Atom x7-E3950 vs Core 2 Duo T7400

Atom x7-E3950

4 Cores4 Thrd12 WWMax: 2 GHz2016

Core 2 Duo T7400

2 Cores2 Thrd4 WWMax: 2.16 GHz2006

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Atom x7-E3950

4 / 4

1,864

+0.2%

1,861

0.0%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Atom x7-E3950 is positioned at rank 480 and the Core 2 Duo T7400 is on rank 1027, so the Atom x7-E3950 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Atom x7-E3950

#153

Core i7-1370P

MSRP: $438|Avg: $280

98%

#467

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

630%

#468

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

620%

#469

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

570%

#470

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

567%

#471

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

562%

#473

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

542%

#474

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

520%

#475

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

519%

#476

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

505%

#480

Atom x7-E3950

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#487

Processor U300

MSRP: $193|Avg: $180

99%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Duo T7400

#1015

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

2364%

#1016

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

2330%

#1017

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

2139%

#1018

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

2129%

#1019

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

2109%

#1021

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

2037%

#1022

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

1953%

#1023

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

1950%

#1024

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

1898%

#1027

Core 2 Duo T7400

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#1028

Celeron B840

MSRP: $86|Avg: $15

100%

#1029

Celeron M 743

MSRP: $107|Avg: $15

100%

#1030

Core i7-3612QM

MSRP: $378|Avg: N/A

99%

#1031

Pentium 967

MSRP: $134|Avg: $10

99%

#1032

Core i5-4400E

MSRP: $266|Avg: $50

98%

#1034

Pentium Dual Core T4400

MSRP: $107|Avg: $5

97%

#1037

Core i7-8665UE

MSRP: $409|Avg: $409

96%

#1038

Celeron T3300

MSRP: $86|Avg: $15

94%

#1039

Celeron Dual-Core T3300

MSRP: $86|Avg: $30

94%

#1042

Core i7-3612QE

MSRP: $426|Avg: $50

93%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Atom x7-E3950 (2016) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR3, DDR4, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	Atom x7-E3950	Core 2 Duo T7400
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	✅ Better multi-core power	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price	Equivalent pricing	Equivalent pricing
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Apollo Lake (2014−2016) / 14 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Merom (2006−2008) / 65 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Core 2 Duo T7400 (2006) relies on 65 nm technology and older memory, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	Atom x7-E3950	Core 2 Duo T7400
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	Equivalent pricing	Equivalent pricing

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Atom x7-E3950 Benchmark Check

Core 2 Duo T7400 Benchmark Check

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Atom x7-E3950 and Core 2 Duo T7400

Atom x7-E3950

The Atom x7-E3950 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB (total). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 12 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,864 points. Launch price was $57.

Core 2 Duo T7400

The Core 2 Duo T7400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 28 August 2006 (19 years ago). It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.16 GHz, with boost up to 2.16 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 34 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,861 points. Launch price was $286.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom x7-E3950 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core 2 Duo T7400 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Atom x7-E3950 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Atom x7-E3950 versus 2.16 GHz on the Core 2 Duo T7400 — a 7.7% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo T7400 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 2.16 GHz). The Atom x7-E3950 uses the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Core 2 Duo T7400 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Atom x7-E3950 scores 1,864 against the Core 2 Duo T7400's 1,861 — a 0.2% lead for the Atom x7-E3950. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 245 vs 310, a 23.4% lead for the Core 2 Duo T7400 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom x7-E3950	Core 2 Duo T7400
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2 GHz	2.16 GHz+8%
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	2.16 GHz+35%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	2 MB (total)	4 MB+100%
Process	14 nm-78%	65 nm
Architecture	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)	Merom (2006−2008)
PassMark	1,864	1,861
Geekbench 6 Single	245	310+27%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	550

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom x7-E3950 uses the FCBGA1296 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Duo T7400 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches LPDDR4-2400 on the Atom x7-E3950 versus DDR2-667 on the Core 2 Duo T7400 — the Atom x7-E3950 supports 66.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Atom x7-E3950 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 4 (Atom x7-E3950) vs 2 (Core 2 Duo T7400). PCIe lanes: 6 (Atom x7-E3950) vs 16 (Core 2 Duo T7400) — the Core 2 Duo T7400 offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Apollo Lake (Atom x7-E3950) and 945GT,GME965 (Core 2 Duo T7400).

Feature	Atom x7-E3950	Core 2 Duo T7400
Socket	FCBGA1296	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR4-2400+100%	DDR2-667
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB+100%	4 GB
RAM Channels	4+100%	2
ECC Support	✅	❌
PCIe Lanes	6	16+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Atom x7-E3950) vs VT-x (Core 2 Duo T7400). The Atom x7-E3950 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 505), while the Core 2 Duo T7400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core 2 Duo T7400 targets Legacy Laptop.