0 Comments
| Intel Pentium E5400 vs Core2 Duo E6550 |
Released January, 2009
Intel Pentium E5400
- 2.7 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Pentium E5400
![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm | ![]() | Significantly higher clock speed 2.7 GHz |
![]() | Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.75 GHz | ![]() | Higher Maximum operating temperature 74.1 °C |
VS
Released July, 2007
Intel Core2 Duo E6550
- 2.33 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Core2 Duo E6550
![]() | Supports trusted computing Yes |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Much newer manufacturing process | 45 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Significantly higher clock speed | 2.7 GHz | vs | 2.33 GHz | More than 15% higher clock speed | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.75 GHz | vs | 3.35 GHz | More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Higher Maximum operating temperature | 74.1 °C | vs | 72 °C | Around 5% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.49 GHz | vs | 3.32 GHz | More than 35% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Newer | Jan, 2009 | vs | Jul, 2007 | Release date over 1 years later | |||
| |||||||
Supports trusted computing | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Pentium E5400 vs Core2 Duo E6550
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Pentium E5400
2,581
Core2 Duo E6550
2,269
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Pentium E5400
1,400
Core2 Duo E6550
1,249
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Pentium E5400
114,800 MB/s
Core2 Duo E6550
99,500 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Pentium E5400
2,391
Core2 Duo E6550
2,195
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Pentium E5400
2,704
Core2 Duo E6550
2,469
GeekBench
Pentium E5400
4,486
Core2 Duo E6550
3,963
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Pentium E5400
1,632
Core2 Duo E6550
1,499
PassMark (Single Core)
Pentium E5400
1,091
Core2 Duo E6550
880
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Pentium E5400 | vs | Core2 Duo E6550 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.7 GHz | 2.33 GHz | |
Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
Socket type | |||
LGA 775 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Supports trusted computing | No | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 65W | 65W | |
Annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | 15.66 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | 56.94 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 1.73 pt/W | 1.37 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 52.81W | 52.81W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
Clock speed | 800 MHz | 1,333 MHz |
details | Pentium E5400 | vs | Core2 Duo E6550 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 2 | 2 | |
L2 cache | 2 MB | 4 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 2 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 45 nm | 65 nm | |
Transistor count | 228,000,000 | 291,000,000 | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Clock multiplier | 13 | 7 | |
Voltage range | 0.85 - 1.36V | 0.85 - 1.5V | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 74.1°C | Unknown - 72°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 3.75 GHz | 3.35 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.49 GHz | 3.32 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.75 GHz | 3.35 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 E5400 ![]() | Intel Core2 Duo E6550 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $67 | |
E8400 vs E5400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $67 | |
E7500 vs E5400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$67 | ||
Q6600 vs E5400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$64 | $67 | |
E5700 vs E5400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $167 | |
E8400 vs E6550 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$72 | $167 | |
E5200 vs E6550 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $167 | |
E7500 vs E6550 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$300 | $305 | |
2500 vs W3520 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $272 | |
6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6410 vs 4200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$161 | $275 | |
N3540 vs 4005U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$230 | $248 | |
9590 vs 4770K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $250 | |
6700K vs 6600K | ||