Winner
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core2 Duo E8400 based on its .
See full details Intel Xeon E5405 vs Core2 Duo E8400 |
Released November, 2007
Intel Xeon E5405
- 2 GHz
- Quad core
6 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Xeon E5405
 | Significantly more l2 cache 12 MB | | Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 |
| | More cores 4 |
VS
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
6.5 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Core2 Duo E8400
| | Significantly higher clock speed 3 GHz | | Much better performance per dollar 14.03 pt/$ |
| | Supports trusted computing Yes | | Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,257 |
by Anthony-Garreffa (Sep, 2012)Your GPU setup is more than good enough to run Battlefield 3 at medium-to-high settings at 1920x1080, so I would suggest waiting and upgrading to an Ivy Bridge setup.
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5405 vs E8400
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| Passmark and GeekBench | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| Passmark (Single Core) | |
Power Consumption | |
How much power does the processor require? | |
| TDP | |
Value | |
| | |
| Performance Per Dollar | |
CPUBoss Score | |
Performance, Single-core Performance, Power Consumption and Value | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
| |  | Intel Core2 Duo E8400CPUBoss Winner |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Significantly more l2 cache | 12 MB | vs | 6 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
| More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| |||||||
| Significantly higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 2 GHz | 50% higher clock speed | |||
| Much better performance per dollar | 14.03 pt/$ | vs | 4.47 pt/$ | Around 3.2x better performance per dollar | |||
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing | |||
| Better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,257 | vs | 862 | More than 45% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 52.81W | vs | 65W | Around 20% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Higher Maximum Operating Temperature | 72.4 °C | vs | 67 °C | Around 10% higher Maximum Operating Temperature | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | vs | 70.08 $/year | Around 20% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | vs | 19.27 $/year | Around 20% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5405 vs Core2 Duo E8400
GeekBench (32-bit)
GeekBench
Passmark
Passmark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Xeon E5405 | vs | Core2 Duo E8400 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2 GHz | 3 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 771 | |||
| LGA 775 | |||
| Is hyperthreaded | No | No | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | No | Yes | |
| Has vitualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction-set-extensions | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 80W | 65W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 19.27 $/year | 15.66 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 70.08 $/year | 56.94 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 5.87 pt/W | 6.04 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 65W | 52.81W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock speed | 1,333 MHz | 1,333 MHz | |
details | Xeon E5405 | vs | Core2 Duo E8400 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 12 MB | 6 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 3 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 45 nms | 45 nms | |
| Transistor count | 820,000,000 | 410,000,000 | |
| Max CPUs | 2 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 6 | 9 | |
| Voltage range | 0.85 - 1.35V | 0.85 - 1.36V | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 67°C | Unknown - 72.4°C | |
gpu | |||
| 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 Xeon E5405  Report a correction |  Intel Core2 Duo E8400 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $28 | $68 | |
| Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Quad Q6600 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $28 | $125 | |
| Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Core i3 3220 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $28 | $85 | |
| Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Quad Q8400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $28 | $22 | |
| Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs E7500 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $28 | $230 | |
| Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Core i5 3570K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $28 | $70 | |
| Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs G3258 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $28 | $379 | |
| Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Quad Q9650 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $313 | $334 | |
| Intel Core i7 4770K vs AMD FX 9590 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $313 | $340 | |
| Intel Core i7 4770K vs 4790K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $313 | $195 | |
| Intel Core i7 4770K vs 4790 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $378 | ||
| AMD A10 5750M vs Intel Core i7 4700MQ | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | $235 | |
| AMD FX 8350 vs Intel Core i5 4670K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | $393 | |
| Intel Core i5 4200U vs i7 4500U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $281 | $225 | |
| Intel Core i5 4200U vs 4200M | ||
