Core 2 Quad Q8400 vs Celeron J4005

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J4005
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
1.00
Core 2 Quad Q8400
2009
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.33
+33%

Core 2 Quad Q8400 outperforms Celeron J4005 by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24712265
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.02no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency9.251.29
Architecture codenameGoldmont Plus (2017)Yorkfield (2007−2009)
Release date11 December 2017 (6 years ago)19 April 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2 GHz2.66 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz0.67 GHz
Bus rateno data1333 MHz
Multiplier20no data
L1 cache112 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache4 MB (shared)4 MB (shared)
L3 cache4 MB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm45 nm
Die size93 mm22x 82 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data71 °C
Number of transistorsno data456 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
VID voltage rangeno data0.85V-1.3625V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCBGA1090FCLGA775,LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift-no data
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Response-no data
Demand Based Switchingno data-
GPIO+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDB++
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400 are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x++
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR1, DDR2, DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth38.397 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics 600On certain motherboards (Chipset feature)
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Graphics max frequency700 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
MIPI-DSI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12no data
OpenGL4.4no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes6no data
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN-no data
UART+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.

Celeron J4005 1.00
Core 2 Quad Q8400 1.33
+33%

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 J4005 1553
Core 2 Quad Q8400 2067
+33.1%

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 J4005 344
+4.9%
Core 2 Quad Q8400 328

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 J4005 579
Core 2 Quad Q8400 893
+54.2%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.00 1.33
Recency 11 December 2017 19 April 2009
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 95 Watt

Celeron J4005 has an age advantage of 8 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 850% lower power consumption.

Core 2 Quad Q8400, on the other hand, has a 33% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

The Core 2 Quad Q8400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J4005 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Quad Q8400, 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 J4005
Celeron J4005
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400
Core 2 Quad Q8400

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.


3.1 163 votes

Rate Celeron J4005 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1338 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q8400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J4005 or Core 2 Quad Q8400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.