0 Comments
| Intel Core2 Duo T7250 vs Celeron T1600 |
Released September, 2007
Intel Core2 Duo T7250
- 2 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Duo T7250
![]() | Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes | ![]() | Has virtualization support Yes |
VS
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Has virtualization support | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines | |||
| |||||||
CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Celeron T1600 vs the Core2 Duo T7250. | |||||||
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo T7250 vs Celeron T1600
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T7250
1,888
Celeron T1600
1,513
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T7250
1,087
Celeron T1600
863
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T7250
86,200 MB/s
Celeron T1600
70,550 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T7250
1,687
Celeron T1600
1,433
GeekBench
Core2 Duo T7250
3,360
Celeron T1600
1,853
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Core2 Duo T7250
1,109
Celeron T1600
931
PassMark (Single Core)
Core2 Duo T7250
710
Celeron T1600
596
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Duo T7250 | vs | Celeron T1600 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.66 GHz | |
Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
Socket type | |||
479 | |||
P | |||
478 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Supports trusted computing | No | No | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | No | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | No | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 35W | 35W | |
Annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | 8.43 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 2.31 pt/W | 1.89 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 28.44W | 28.44W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
Clock speed | 800 MHz | 667 MHz |
details | Core2 Duo T7250 | vs | Celeron T1600 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 2 | 2 | |
L2 cache | 2 MB | 1 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 65 nm | 65 nm | |
Transistor count | 291,000,000 | 291,000,000 | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Clock multiplier | 10 | 10 | |
Voltage range | 1.07 - 1.18V | 1.07 - 1.18V | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 2.29 GHz | 2.27 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2 GHz | 1.67 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.29 GHz | 2.27 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
GPU | None | None | |
Label | N/A | N/A | |
Latest DirectX | N/A | N/A | |
Number of displays supported | N/A | N/A | |
GPU clock speed | N/A | N/A | |
Turbo clock speed | N/A | N/A | |
3DMark06 | N/A | N/A |
Intel Core2 Duo T7250 ![]() | Intel Celeron T1600 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$135 | $197 | |
2120 vs T7250 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$309 | $197 | |
T9300 vs T7250 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$309 | $197 | |
T7700 vs T7250 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$236 | $197 | |
T8300 vs T7250 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$197 | ||
P540 vs T7250 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$211 | $197 | |
P8600 vs T7250 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
T2370 vs T1600 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$300 | $305 | |
2500 vs W3520 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $272 | |
6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6410 vs 4200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$161 | $275 | |
N3540 vs 4005U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
5200 vs 3470 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$225 | $134 | |
3217U vs 847 | ||