0 Comments
| Intel Core2 Duo T7500 vs AMD E 450 |
Released July, 2006
Intel Core2 Duo T7500
- 2.2 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Duo T7500
![]() | Much more l2 cache 4 MB | ![]() | Higher clock speed 2.2 GHz |
![]() | Much more l2 cache per core 2 MB/core | ![]() | Much better PassMark (Single core) score 1,851 |
VS
Released August, 2011
AMD E 450
- 1.65 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the AMD E 450
![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 40 nm | ![]() | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
![]() | Lower typical power consumption 14.63W | ![]() | Better CompuBench 1.5 ocean surface simulation score 60.83 fps |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Intel Core2 Duo T7500CPUBoss Winner | ![]() | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Much more l2 cache | 4 MB | vs | 1 MB | 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Higher clock speed | 2.2 GHz | vs | 1.65 GHz | Around 35% higher clock speed | |||
Much more l2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 4x more l2 cache per core | |||
Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,851 | vs | 431 | More than 4.2x better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
Significantly better PassMark score | 7,135 | vs | 770 | More than 9.2x better PassMark score | |||
Better performance per watt | 4.11 pt/W | vs | 2.98 pt/W | Around 40% better performance per watt | |||
| |||||||
Much newer manufacturing process | 40 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
Lower typical power consumption | 14.63W | vs | 28.44W | Around 50% lower typical power consumption | |||
Better CompuBench 1.5 ocean surface simulation score | 60.83 fps | vs | 15.23 fps | Around 4x better CompuBench 1.5 ocean surface simulation score | |||
Newer | Aug, 2011 | vs | Jul, 2006 | Release date over 5 years later | |||
Lower annual home energy cost | 4.34 $/year | vs | 8.43 $/year | Around 50% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Lower annual commercial energy cost | 15.77 $/year | vs | 30.66 $/year | Around 50% lower annual commercial energy cost |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo T7500 vs E 450
CompuBench 1.5 (Ocean surface simulation) Data courtesy CompuBench
Core2 Duo T7500
15.23 fps
E 450
60.83 fps
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T7500
1,995
E 450
1,127
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T7500
1,183
E 450
642
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T7500
89,900 MB/s
E 450
53,200 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T7500
1,917
E 450
1,056
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T7500
1,969
E 450
1,181
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Core2 Duo T7500
7,135
E 450
770
PassMark (Single Core)
Core2 Duo T7500
1,851
E 450
431
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Duo T7500 | vs | E 450 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 1.65 GHz | |
Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
Socket type | |||
P | |||
479 | |||
Super 7 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE4a | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
AMD64 | |||
AMD-V | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
bus | |||
Clock speed | 800 MHz | 100 MHz |
details | Core2 Duo T7500 | vs | E 450 |
---|---|---|---|
Threads | 2 | 2 | |
L2 cache | 4 MB | 1 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 65 nm | 40 nm | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Clock multiplier | 11 | 25 | |
integrated graphics | |||
GPU | None | GPU | |
Label | N/A | Radeon™ HD 6320 | |
Latest DirectX | N/A | 11.0 | |
GPU clock speed | N/A | 508 MHz | |
Turbo clock speed | N/A | 600 MHz | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 35W | 18W | |
Annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | 4.34 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 30.66 $/year | 15.77 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 4.11 pt/W | 2.98 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 28.44W | 14.63W |
Intel Core2 Duo T7500 ![]() | AMD E 450 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$225 | ||
450 vs 3217U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
450 vs 350 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
450 vs 1800 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$134 | ||
450 vs 847 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$236 | $197 | |
T7500 vs T8100 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$236 | $236 | |
T7500 vs T8300 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$236 | $309 | |
T7500 vs T9300 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
4005U vs N3540 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$248 | $230 | |
4770K vs 9590 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$250 | $350 | |
6600K vs 6700K | ||