Athlon 64 3400+ vs Core 2 Duo T5900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo T5900 and Athlon 64 3400+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Core 2 Duono data
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Clawhammer (2001−2005)
Release date1 October 2008 (16 years ago)January 2001 (23 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo T5900 and Athlon 64 3400+ 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
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus rate800 MHzno data
L1 cache128 KB128 KB
L2 cache2 MB512K
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm130 nm
Die sizeno data193 mm2
Number of transistorsno data105 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo T5900 and Athlon 64 3400+ 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 configurationno data1
SocketSocket P754
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt89 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo T5900 and Athlon 64 3400+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
AMT+no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Duo T5900 and Athlon 64 3400+ technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+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.



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.

Core 2 Duo T5900 652
+106%
Athlon 64 3400+ 317

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 65 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 89 Watt

Core 2 Duo T5900 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 154.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Core 2 Duo T5900 and Athlon 64 3400+. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Core 2 Duo T5900 is a notebook processor while Athlon 64 3400+ is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo T5900 and Athlon 64 3400+, 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 Core 2 Duo T5900
Core 2 Duo T5900
AMD Athlon 64 3400+
Athlon 64 3400+

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.


3.7 9 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo T5900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.2 20 votes

Rate Athlon 64 3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Duo T5900 or Athlon 64 3400+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.