Celeron T3000 vs Core 2 Extreme X9000

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Extreme X9000
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 44 Watt
0.69
+60.5%
Celeron T3000
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.43

Core 2 Extreme X9000 outperforms Celeron T3000 by an impressive 60% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Extreme X9000 and Celeron T3000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27112951
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core 2 Extremeno data
Power efficiency1.481.16
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)no data
Release date10 January 2008 (16 years ago)1 April 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$851no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Extreme X9000 and Celeron T3000 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 speed2.8 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.8 GHzno data
Bus rate800 MHzno data
L1 cache128 KBno data
L2 cache6 MBno data
L3 cache6 MB L2 Cache1 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography45 nm45 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
Number of transistors410 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1V-1.275V1V-1.25V

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Extreme X9000 and Celeron T3000 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.

SocketPGA478PGA478
Power consumption (TDP)44 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Extreme X9000 and Celeron T3000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+-
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Demand Based Switching--
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Extreme X9000 and Celeron T3000 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Extreme X9000 and Celeron T3000 are enumerated here.

VT-x+-

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 Extreme X9000 0.69
+60.5%
Celeron T3000 0.43

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 Extreme X9000 1099
+60%
Celeron T3000 687

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 Extreme X9000 421
+87.1%
Celeron T3000 225

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 Extreme X9000 719
+87.2%
Celeron T3000 384

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.69 0.43
Recency 10 January 2008 1 April 2009
Power consumption (TDP) 44 Watt 35 Watt

Core 2 Extreme X9000 has a 60.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron T3000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 25.7% lower power consumption.

The Core 2 Extreme X9000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron T3000 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Extreme X9000 and Celeron T3000, 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 Extreme X9000
Core 2 Extreme X9000
Intel Celeron T3000
Celeron T3000

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 40 votes

Rate Core 2 Extreme X9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Celeron T3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Extreme X9000 or Celeron T3000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.