0 Comments
| 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) |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo T9400 vs Core i3 3220
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T9400
2,521
Core i3 3220
5,399
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T9400
1,407
Core i3 3220
2,501
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T9400
103,400 MB/s
Core i3 3220
173,000 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T9400
2,328
Core i3 3220
5,351
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo T9400
2,679
Core i3 3220
5,707
GeekBench
Core2 Duo T9400
4,090
Core i3 3220
8,919
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Core2 Duo T9400
1,736
Core i3 3220
4,229
PassMark (Single Core)
Core2 Duo T9400
991
Core i3 3220
1,764
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 ![]() | Intel Core i3 3220 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $50 | |
Intel Core i3 3220 vs AMD A4 5300 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | ||
Intel Core i3 3220 vs Core2 Quad Q6600 | ||
![]() | 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 | ![]() |
$248 | $230 | |
Intel Core i7 4770K vs AMD FX 9590 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$250 | $350 | |
Intel Core i5 6600K vs i7 6700K | ||