Celeron Dual-Core T1400 vs Dual-Core T3500
Aggregate performance score
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T1400 by an impressive 86% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2621 | 2974 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron Dual-Core | Intel Celeron Dual-Core |
| Power efficiency | 2.18 | 1.17 |
| Architecture codename | Penryn (2008−2011) | Merom-2M (2008) |
| Release date | 26 September 2010 (14 years ago) | 1 May 2008 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 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 | 2.1 GHz | 1.73 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | 533 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 410 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 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.
| Socket | Socket P PGA478 | P |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 35 Watt |
Security technologies
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
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.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.80 | 0.43 |
| Recency | 26 September 2010 | 1 May 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 65 nm |
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 has a 86% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.
The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron Dual-Core T1400 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
