Celeron M U3400 vs Core 2 Duo T9300

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron M U3400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2420not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core 2 DuoIntel Celeron M
Power efficiency2.85no data
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Arrandale (2010−2011)
Release date10 January 2008 (16 years ago)24 May 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$316no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron M U3400 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 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz1.06 GHz
Bus rate800 MHz2500 MHz
L1 cache128 KBno data
L2 cache6 MB512 KB
L3 cache6 MB L2 Cache2 MB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size107 mm281+114 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
Number of transistors410 Million382+177 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1V-1.25Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron M U3400 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.

SocketBGA479,PGA478BGA1288
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron M U3400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switching-no data
Fast Memory Accessno data+
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron M U3400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron M U3400 are enumerated here.

VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron M U3400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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
+132%
Celeron M U3400 1205

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
+124%
Celeron M U3400 2317

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
+128%
Celeron M U3400 988

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
+96.8%
Celeron M U3400 62.2

Pros & cons summary


Recency 10 January 2008 24 May 2010
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 18 Watt

Celeron M U3400 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 94.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron M U3400. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo T9300 and Celeron M U3400, 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 M U3400
Celeron M U3400

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
2.8 4 votes

Rate Celeron M U3400 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 M U3400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.