CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E2160 vs 347 among desktop CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Fire Strike

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

3.2

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Pentium E2160 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Pentium E2160  based on its performance and single-core performance.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Pentium E2160

Reasons to consider the
Intel Pentium E2160

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.5 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More threads 2 vs 1 Twice as many threads
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed
Significantly lower typical power consumption 52.81W vs 69.88W Around 25% lower typical power consumption
Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature 73.3 °C vs 69.2 °C More than 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.72 GHz vs 3.07 GHz More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year vs 20.72 $/year Around 25% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year vs 75.34 $/year Around 25% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of Intel Celeron D 347

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron D 347

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 3.06 GHz vs 1.8 GHz 70% higher clock speed
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.59 GHz vs 3.11 GHz Around 50% better overclocked clock speed (Air)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Pentium E2160 vs Celeron D 347

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Pentium E2160  vs
Celeron D 347 
Clock speed 1.8 GHz 3.06 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 No

power consumption

TDP 65W 86W
Annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year 20.72 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year 75.34 $/year
Performance per watt 1.12 pt/W 0.47 pt/W
Typical power consumption 52.81W 69.88W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Clock speed 800 MHz 533 MHz

details

Pentium E2160  vs
Celeron D 347 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 1
L2 cache 1 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 65 nm
Transistor count 105,000,000 188,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 9 23
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.5V 1.25 - 1.32V
Operating temperature Unknown - 73.3°C Unknown - 69.2°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.11 GHz 4.59 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.72 GHz 3.07 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.11 GHz 4.59 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 E2160
Report a correction
Intel Celeron D 347
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus