Celeron E3400 vs Pentium E6300

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Pentium E6300
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.65
+20.4%
Celeron E3400
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.54

Pentium E6300 outperforms Celeron E3400 by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Pentium E6300 and Celeron E3400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27652853
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.593.72
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency0.950.79
Architecture codenameWolfdale (2008−2010)Wolfdale (2008−2010)
Release date9 May 2009 (15 years ago)17 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$40$76

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron E3400 has 4% better value for money than Pentium E6300.

Detailed specifications

Pentium E6300 and Celeron E3400 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 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.8 GHz2.6 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB (shared)1 MB (shared)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm45 nm
Die size82 mm282 mm2
Maximum core temperature74 °C74 °C
Number of transistors228 million228 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625V0.85V-1.3625V

Compatibility

Information on Pentium E6300 and Celeron E3400 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)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium E6300 and Celeron E3400. 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-no data

Security technologies

Pentium E6300 and Celeron E3400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium E6300 and Celeron E3400 are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pentium E6300 and Celeron E3400. 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 cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pentium E6300 and Celeron E3400.

PCIe version2.02.0

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.

Pentium E6300 0.65
+20.4%
Celeron E3400 0.54

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.

Pentium E6300 1032
+20%
Celeron E3400 860

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.

Pentium E6300 295
+1.7%
Celeron E3400 290

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.

Pentium E6300 465
Celeron E3400 485
+4.3%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.65 0.54
Recency 9 May 2009 17 January 2010

Pentium E6300 has a 20.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron E3400, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 months.

The Pentium E6300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E3400 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium E6300 and Celeron E3400, 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 Pentium E6300
Pentium E6300
Intel Celeron E3400
Celeron E3400

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.


3.1 78 votes

Rate Pentium E6300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 273 votes

Rate Celeron E3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Pentium E6300 or Celeron E3400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.