Intel Pentium E2140 vs 4 630 |
Released April, 2007
Intel Pentium E2140
- 1.6 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Pentium E2140
 | Much newer manufacturing process 65 nm | | More cores 2 |
| | Significantly lower typical power consumption 52.81W | | Significantly lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year |
VS
Released October, 2005
Intel Pentium 4 630
- 3 GHz
- Single core
Reasons to buy the 4 630
| | Much higher clock speed 3 GHz | | Much more l2 cache 2 MB |
| | Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.83 GHz | | Much more l2 cache per core 2 MB/core |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 65 nm | vs | 90 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| More cores | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| Significantly lower typical power consumption | 52.81W | vs | 68.25W | Around 25% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Significantly lower annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | vs | 20.24 $/year | Around 25% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | vs | 73.58 $/year | Around 25% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Newer | Apr, 2007 | vs | Oct, 2005 | Release date over 1 years later | |||
| |||||||
| Much higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 1.6 GHz | More than 85% higher clock speed | |||
| Much more l2 cache | 2 MB | vs | 1 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.83 GHz | vs | 3 GHz | Around 30% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 4x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Much higher Maximum operating temperature | 66.6 °C | vs | 61.4 °C | Around 10% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.33 GHz | vs | 3.06 GHz | More than 40% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Pentium E2140 vs 4 630
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Pentium E2140 | vs | 4 630 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 3 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Single core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 775 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | No | No | |
| Has virtualization support | No | No | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 65W | 84W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | 20.24 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | 73.58 $/year | |
| Typical power consumption | 52.81W | 68.25W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock speed | 800 MHz | 800 MHz | |
details | Pentium E2140 | vs | 4 630 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 2 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 2 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 65 nm | 90 nm | |
| Transistor count | 105,000,000 | 169,000,000 | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 8 | 15 | |
| Voltage range | 0.85 - 1.5V | 1.2 - 1.4V | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 61.4°C | Unknown - 66.6°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclock popularity | 4 | 8 | |
| Overclocked clock speed | 3 GHz | 3.83 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.06 GHz | 4.33 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3 GHz | 3.83 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 Pentium E2140  Report a correction |  Intel Pentium 4 630 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $69 | ||
| 630 vs E6300 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $69 | $179 | |
| 630 vs E8400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $69 | $163 | |
| 630 vs 945 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $69 | ||
| 630 vs 3200+ | ||
| | VS |  |
| $69 | $54 | |
| 630 vs 355 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $69 | $74 | |
| 630 vs 820 | ||
 | VS | |
| $67 | $179 | |
| E2140 vs E8400 | ||
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 | ||
