Celeron E1400 vs i5-2500

VS

Primary details

Comparing Core i5-2500 and Celeron E1400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1722not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.66no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency2.58no data
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Allendale (2006−2009)
Release date9 January 2011 (13 years ago)April 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$85$57

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i5-2500 and Celeron E1400 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 speed3.3 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)512 KB (shared)
L3 cache6144 KB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size216 mm277 mm2
Maximum core temperature73 °C73 °C
Number of transistors1,160 million105 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.85V-1.5V

Compatibility

Information on Core i5-2500 and Celeron E1400 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
SocketLGA1155LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-2500 and Celeron E1400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVXno data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Core i5-2500 and Celeron E1400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++
Identity Protection+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-2500 and Celeron E1400 are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x+-
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-2500 and Celeron E1400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1, DDR2, DDR3
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 2000no data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1.1 GHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i5-2500 and Celeron E1400 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-2500 and Celeron E1400.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no 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.

i5-2500 4112
+459%
Celeron E1400 735

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.

i5-2500 591
+169%
Celeron E1400 220

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.

i5-2500 1686
+330%
Celeron E1400 392

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 65 Watt

i5-2500 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron E1400, on the other hand, has 46.2% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Core i5-2500 and Celeron E1400. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-2500 and Celeron E1400, 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 i5-2500
Core i5-2500
Intel Celeron E1400
Celeron E1400

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.


3.9 1656 votes

Rate Core i5-2500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 61 vote

Rate Celeron E1400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i5-2500 or Celeron E1400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.