Pentium Dual-Core E2180 vs Celeron Dual-Core T3000
Aggregate performance score
Primary details
Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3000 and Pentium Dual-Core E2180 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2966 | 2972 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron Dual-Core | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.16 | 0.63 |
| Architecture codename | Penryn-1M (2009) | Allendale (2006−2009) |
| Release date | 1 May 2009 (15 years ago) | August 2007 (17 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron Dual-Core T3000 and Pentium Dual-Core E2180 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | 77 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 410 Million | 105 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3000 and Pentium Dual-Core E2180 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 configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | P (478) | 775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3000 and Pentium Dual-Core E2180. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3000 and Pentium Dual-Core E2180. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron Dual-Core T3000 has a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron Dual-Core T3000 and Pentium Dual-Core E2180.
Be aware that Celeron Dual-Core T3000 is a notebook processor while Pentium Dual-Core E2180 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3000 and Pentium Dual-Core E2180, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
