Intel Pentium T4200 vs Core2 Duo T6400 |
VS
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of T4200 vs T6400 among laptop CPUs (over 15W)
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 | |
| Sky Diver and Cloud Gate | |
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? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
No winner declared
Too close to call
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Pentium T4200 vs the Core2 Duo T6400. | |||||||
| |||||||
| CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Core2 Duo T6400 vs the Pentium T4200. | |||||||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Pentium T4200 vs Core2 Duo T6400
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 T4200 | vs | Core2 Duo T6400 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2 GHz | 2 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| 478 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | No | No | |
| Has virtualization support | No | No | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 35W | 35W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | 8.43 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 2.58 pt/W | 3.85 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 28.44W | 28.44W | |
details | Pentium T4200 | vs | Core2 Duo T6400 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 2 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 45 nm | 45 nm | |
| Transistor count | 410,000,000 | 410,000,000 | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 10 | 10 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 2.43 GHz | 4.13 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2 GHz | 4.91 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.43 GHz | 4.13 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 | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock speed | 800 MHz | 800 MHz | |
 Intel Pentium T4200  Report a correction |  Intel Core2 Duo T6400 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $2 | $125 | |
| T4200 vs 3220 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $2 | $236 | |
| T4200 vs T7500 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $2 | ||
| T4200 vs T4300 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $2 | ||
| T4200 vs T7300 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $2 | $145 | |
| T4200 vs E8400 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $316 | ||
| T6400 vs T9600 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $225 | ||
| T6400 vs 3217U | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 3470 vs 5200 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | $50 | |
| 3220 vs 5300 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| 4005U vs N3540 | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 1 comment.
