Celeron 2955U vs Core 2 Duo T9300

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo T9300
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
1.05
+90.9%
Celeron 2955U
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.55

Core 2 Duo T9300 outperforms Celeron 2955U by an impressive 91% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron 2955U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24222830
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core 2 DuoIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.843.47
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Haswell (2013−2015)
Release date10 January 2008 (16 years ago)1 September 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$316no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron 2955U 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed2.5 GHz1.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz1.4 GHz
Bus rate800 MHz5 GT/s
L1 cache128 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache6 MB256K (per core)
L3 cache6 MB L2 Cache2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm22 nm
Die size107 mm2118 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data105 °C
Number of transistors410 Million1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1V-1.25Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron 2955U 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
SocketBGA479,PGA478FCBGA1168
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron 2955U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring-+
Smart Responseno data-
Demand Based Switching-no data
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data+
FDIno data-
AMTno data9.5
Matrix Storageno data-
FSB parity-no data
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data+

Security technologies

Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron 2955U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron 2955U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-dno data-
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron 2955U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics for 4th Generation Intel Processors
Clear Videono data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron 2955U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron 2955U.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data10
PCI supportno data-
USB revisionno data3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Integrated IDEno data-
Number of USB portsno data4
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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.

Core 2 Duo T9300 1.05
+90.9%
Celeron 2955U 0.55

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 T9300 1670
+90.4%
Celeron 2955U 877

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.

Core 2 Duo T9300 314
+18%
Celeron 2955U 266

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.

Core 2 Duo T9300 506
+11.2%
Celeron 2955U 455

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Core 2 Duo T9300 2799
+35.3%
Celeron 2955U 2069

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.

Core 2 Duo T9300 5190
+29.7%
Celeron 2955U 4000

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Core 2 Duo T9300 2258
+48.5%
Celeron 2955U 1520

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.

Core 2 Duo T9300 31.6
+68.4%
Celeron 2955U 53.2

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.05 0.55
Recency 10 January 2008 1 September 2013
Chip lithography 45 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

Core 2 Duo T9300 has a 90.9% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron 2955U, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Core 2 Duo T9300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 2955U in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron 2955U, 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 T9300
Core 2 Duo T9300
Intel Celeron 2955U
Celeron 2955U

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.


4.2 327 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo T9300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 67 votes

Rate Celeron 2955U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Duo T9300 or Celeron 2955U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.