Intel Core2 Duo T9400 vs Core i3 3220 |
Released July, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo T9400
- 2.53 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Duo T9400
 | Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 2,304 | | Much more l2 cache 6 MB |
| | Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core | | Lower typical power consumption 28.44W |
VS
Released September, 2012
Intel Core i3 3220
- 3.3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Core i3 3220
| | Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm | | Significantly higher clock speed 3.3 GHz |
| | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Much better performance per dollar 1.18 pt/$ |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
| |  | Intel Core i3 3220CPUBoss Winner |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much better 3DMark06 CPU score | 2,304 | vs | 47.7 | More than 48.2x better 3DMark06 CPU score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much more l2 cache | 6 MB | vs | 0.5 MB | 12x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | vs | 0.25 MB/core | 12x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 28.44W | vs | 44.69W | More than 35% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | vs | 13.25 $/year | More than 35% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 30.66 $/year | vs | 48.18 $/year | More than 35% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| |||||||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 22 nm | vs | 45 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Significantly higher clock speed | 3.3 GHz | vs | 2.53 GHz | More than 30% higher clock speed | |||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Much better performance per dollar | 1.18 pt/$ | vs | 0.27 pt/$ | Around 4.5x better performance per dollar | |||
| Significantly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | 5,399 | vs | 2,521 | Around 2.2x better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.43 GHz | vs | 1.8 GHz | More than 90% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,764 | vs | 991 | Around 80% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Newer | Sep, 2012 | vs | Jul, 2008 | Release date over 4 years later | |||
| More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.46 GHz | vs | 1.8 GHz | More than 90% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo T9400 vs Core i3 3220
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Duo T9400 | vs | Core i3 3220 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.53 GHz | 3.3 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| 478 | |||
| P | |||
| LGA 1155 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | No | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| AES | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 35W | 55W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | 13.25 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 30.66 $/year | 48.18 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 2.54 pt/W | 2.69 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 28.44W | 44.69W | |
details | Core2 Duo T9400 | vs | Core i3 3220 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 4 | |
| L2 cache | 6 MB | 0.5 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 0.25 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 45 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 9 | 33 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 3.43 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.8 GHz | 3.46 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 1.8 GHz | 3.43 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | GPU | |
| Label | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics 2500 | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | 3 | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | 650 MHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | 1,050 MHz | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | DMI | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
 Intel Core2 Duo T9400  Report a correction |  Intel Core i3 3220 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $125 | ||
| Intel Core i3 3220 vs Core2 Quad Q6600 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | $50 | |
| Intel Core i3 3220 vs AMD A4 5300 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | $75 | |
| Intel Core i3 3220 vs Pentium G2020 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | $94 | |
| Intel Core i3 3220 vs Pentium J2900 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | $82 | |
| Intel Core i3 3220 vs Celeron J1900 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | $179 | |
| Intel Core i3 3220 vs Core2 Duo E8400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | ||
| Intel Core i3 3220 vs AMD E1 2500 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| Intel Xeon W3520 vs Core i5 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| Intel Core i7 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| Intel Core i5 4200U vs AMD A8 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| Intel Core i5 6200U vs AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| Intel Core i3 4005U vs Pentium N3540 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| Intel Celeron 847 vs Core i3 3217U | ||
 | VS | |
| $250 | $350 | |
| Intel Core i5 6600K vs i7 6700K | ||
