Celeron 420 vs E3400

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron E3400
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.54
+260%
Celeron 420
2007
1 core / 1 thread, 35 Watt
0.15

Celeron E3400 outperforms Celeron 420 by a whopping 260% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron E3400 and Celeron 420 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28523323
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.72no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency0.780.40
Architecture codenameWolfdale (2008−2010)Conroe-L (2007−2008)
Release date17 January 2010 (14 years ago)June 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$76$23

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron E3400 and Celeron 420 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads21
Base clock speed2.6 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.6 GHz1.6 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB
L2 cache1 MB (shared)512 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm65 nm
Die size82 mm277 mm2
Maximum core temperature74 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data60 °C
Number of transistors228 million105 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625V1V-1.3375V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron E3400 and Celeron 420 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 configuration11
SocketLGA775LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E3400 and Celeron 420. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+-
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Celeron E3400 and Celeron 420 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron E3400 and Celeron 420 are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E3400 and Celeron 420. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E3400 and Celeron 420.

PCIe version2.0no 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.

Celeron E3400 0.54
+260%
Celeron 420 0.15

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.

Celeron E3400 860
+266%
Celeron 420 235

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.54 0.15
Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 45 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 35 Watt

Celeron E3400 has a 260% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron 420, on the other hand, has 85.7% lower power consumption.

The Celeron E3400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 420 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E3400 and Celeron 420, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 E3400
Celeron E3400
Intel Celeron 420
Celeron 420

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.

Community ratings

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


3.2 273 votes

Rate Celeron E3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 169 votes

Rate Celeron 420 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron E3400 or Celeron 420, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.