Intel Pentium T3400 vs AMD E 300 |
Released October, 2008
Intel Pentium T3400
- 2.16 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Pentium T3400
 | Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 1,779 | | Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 91,100 MB/s |
| | Significantly higher clock speed 2.16 GHz |
VS
Released August, 2011
AMD E 300
- 1.3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the AMD E 300
| | Much newer manufacturing process 40 nm | | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
| | Has virtualization support Yes | | Lower typical power consumption 14.63W |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Intel Pentium T3400CPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much better 3DMark06 CPU score | 1,779 | vs | 20.3 | Around 87.8x better 3DMark06 CPU score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score | 91,100 MB/s | vs | 41,900 MB/s | Around 2.2x better geekbench 3 AES single core score | |||
| Significantly higher clock speed | 2.16 GHz | vs | 1.3 GHz | More than 65% higher clock speed | |||
| |||||||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 40 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Has virtualization support | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 14.63W | vs | 28.44W | Around 50% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Newer | Aug, 2011 | vs | Oct, 2008 | Release date over 2 years later | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 4.34 $/year | vs | 8.43 $/year | Around 50% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 15.77 $/year | vs | 30.66 $/year | Around 50% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Pentium T3400 vs E 300
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 | Pentium T3400 | vs | E 300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.16 GHz | 1.3 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | No | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| AMD64 | |||
| AMD-V | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
details | Pentium T3400 | vs | E 300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threads | 2 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 65 nm | 40 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 13 | 5 | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | GPU | |
| Label | N/A | Radeon™ HD 6310 | |
| Latest DirectX | N/A | 11.0 | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | 488 MHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 35W | 18W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | 4.34 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 30.66 $/year | 15.77 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 2.4 pt/W | 2.34 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 28.44W | 14.63W | |
 Intel Pentium T3400  Report a correction |  AMD E 300 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| Intel Core i5 2500 vs Xeon W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| Intel Core i7 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A8 6410 vs Intel Core i5 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 vs Intel Core i5 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| Intel Pentium N3540 vs Core i3 4005U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $230 | $248 | |
| AMD FX 9590 vs Intel Core i7 4770K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $350 | $250 | |
| Intel Core i7 6700K vs i5 6600K | ||
