Core 2 Duo P8400 vs Celeron 4305UE

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 4305UE
2018
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.96
+95.9%

Celeron 4305UE outperforms Core 2 Duo P8400 by an impressive 96% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26873125
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.100.02
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Core 2 Duo
Power efficiency2.720.83
DesignerIntelIntel
ManufacturerIntelno data
Architecture codenameWhiskey Lake-U (2018−2019)Penryn (2008−2011)
Release date1 October 2018 (7 years ago)15 July 2008 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$209

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron 4305UE has 5400% better value for money than Core 2 Duo P8400.

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Celeron 4305UE and Core 2 Duo P8400 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speedno data2.26 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz2.26 GHz
Bus rateno data1066 MHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)3 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)3 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography10 nm45 nm
Die sizeno data107 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistorsno data410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
VID voltage rangeno data1.05V-1.15V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 4305UE and Core 2 Duo P8400 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1no data
SocketIntel BGA 1528BGA479,PBGA479,PGA478
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 4305UE and Core 2 Duo P8400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Celeron 4305UE and Core 2 Duo P8400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 4305UE and Core 2 Duo P8400 are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 4305UE and Core 2 Duo P8400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics 610no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 4305UE and Core 2 Duo P8400.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no data

Synthetic benchmarks

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating.

Celeron 4305UE 0.96
+95.9%
Core 2 Duo P8400 0.49

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.

Celeron 4305UE 1699
+96.6%
Samples: 5
Core 2 Duo P8400 864
Samples: 1296

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Celeron 4305UE 668
+143%
Core 2 Duo P8400 275

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Celeron 4305UE 1086
+146%
Core 2 Duo P8400 441

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.96 0.49
Recency 1 October 2018 15 July 2008
Chip lithography 10 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 25 Watt

Celeron 4305UE has a 95.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 350% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Intel Celeron 4305UE is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core 2 Duo P8400 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron 4305UE
Celeron 4305UE
Intel Core 2 Duo P8400
Core 2 Duo P8400

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron 4305UE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 108 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo P8400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Celeron 4305UE and Core 2 Duo P8400, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.