Celeron E1600 vs Core 2 Quad Q8300

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q8300
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.19
+125%
Celeron E1600
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.53

Core 2 Quad Q8300 outperforms Celeron E1600 by a whopping 125% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q8300 and Celeron E1600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23462851
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.190.77
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Allendale (2006−2009)
Release dateNovember 2008 (16 years ago)31 May 2009 (15 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q8300 and Celeron E1600 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed2.5 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache4 MB (shared)512 KB (shared)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm65 nm
Die size2x 81 mm277 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data73 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors456 million105 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625V0.85V-1.5V

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q8300 and Celeron E1600 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 configuration11
SocketLGA775LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q8300 and Celeron E1600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Demand Based Switching--
FSB parity--

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q8300 and Celeron E1600 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad Q8300 and Celeron E1600 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q8300 and Celeron E1600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q8300 and Celeron E1600.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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 Quad Q8300 1.19
+125%
Celeron E1600 0.53

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 Quad Q8300 1891
+125%
Celeron E1600 840

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.19 0.53
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 65 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q8300 has a 124.5% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron E1600, on the other hand, has 46.2% lower power consumption.

The Core 2 Quad Q8300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E1600 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q8300 and Celeron E1600, 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 Quad Q8300
Core 2 Quad Q8300
Intel Celeron E1600
Celeron E1600

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.


3.8 594 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q8300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 5 votes

Rate Celeron E1600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q8300 or Celeron E1600, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.