0 Comments
| Intel Core2 Duo T9400 vs AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-88 |
VS
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Intel Core2 Duo T9400 vs the AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-88. | |||||||
| |||||||
CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-88 vs the Intel Core2 Duo T9400. | |||||||
Features Key features of the Core2 Duo T9400 vs Turion X2 Ultra ZM-88
clock speed
Core2 Duo T9400
2.53 GHz
Turion X2 Ultra ZM-88
2.5 GHz
L2 cache
Core2 Duo T9400
6 MB
overclocked clock speed (air)
Core2 Duo T9400
1.8 GHz
Turion X2 Ultra ZM-88
2.5 GHz
overclocked clock speed (water)
Core2 Duo T9400
1.8 GHz
Turion X2 Ultra ZM-88
2.5 GHz
TDP
Core2 Duo T9400
35W
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Duo T9400 | vs | Turion X2 Ultra ZM-88 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.53 GHz | 2.5 GHz | |
Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
3DNow! | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
bus | |||
Clock speed | 1,066 MHz | 400 MHz |
details | Core2 Duo T9400 | vs | Turion X2 Ultra ZM-88 |
---|---|---|---|
Threads | 2 | 2 | |
L2 cache | 6 MB | 2 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 45 nm | 65 nm | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 2.5 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.8 GHz | 2.5 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 1.8 GHz | 2.5 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 35W | 35W | |
Annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | 8.43 $/year | |
Typical power consumption | 28.44W | 28.44W |
Intel Core2 Duo T9400 ![]() | AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-88 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$331 | $209 | |
T9400 vs P8700 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$331 | $30 | |
T9400 vs 520M | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$331 | $211 | |
T9400 vs P8600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$331 | $125 | |
T9400 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$331 | $364 | |
T9400 vs P9500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$331 | $316 | |
T9400 vs T9600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$331 | $211 | |
T9400 vs P8400 | ||
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 | ![]() |
$180 | ||
3470 vs 5200 | ||