Celeron N2930 vs Core 2 Duo E7400

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.

Celeron N2930 vs Core 2 Duo E7400 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Celeron N2930 vs Core 2 Duo E7400: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Celeron N2930

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 7W instead of 65W, a 58W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics, while Core 2 Duo E7400 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,032 vs 1,043).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core 2 Duo E7400.

Core 2 Duo E7400

2008

Why buy it

✅300% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Celeron N2930.

Trade-offs

❌828.6% higher power demand at 65W vs 7W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2930 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core 2 Duo E7400 better than Celeron N2930?

Yes. Core 2 Duo E7400 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.1% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core 2 Duo E7400 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.2% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Duo E7400 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core 2 Duo E7400 still makes the most sense overall. Core 2 Duo E7400 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron N2930 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron N2930 vs Core 2 Duo E7400 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron N2930

The Celeron N2930 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.83 GHz, with boost up to 2.16 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,032 points. Launch price was $69.

Core 2 Duo E7400

The Core 2 Duo E7400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 3 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,043 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N2930 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core 2 Duo E7400 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N2930 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.16 GHz on the Celeron N2930 versus 2.8 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E7400 — a 25.8% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo E7400 (base: 1.83 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Celeron N2930 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Core 2 Duo E7400 uses Wolfdale (2008−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2930 scores 1,032 against the Core 2 Duo E7400's 1,043 — a 1.1% lead for the Core 2 Duo E7400. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron N2930	Core 2 Duo E7400
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.16 GHz	2.8 GHz+30%
Base Clock	1.83 GHz	2.8 GHz+53%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+16967%	3 MB (total)
Process	22 nm-51%	45 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	Wolfdale (2008−2010)
PassMark	1,032	1,043+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	170	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	502	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2930 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core 2 Duo E7400 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron N2930 versus 1066 on the Core 2 Duo E7400 — the Celeron N2930 supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core 2 Duo E7400 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N2930) vs 16 (Core 2 Duo E7400) — the Core 2 Duo E7400 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (Celeron N2930) and P35,G31,G33,P45 (Core 2 Duo E7400).

Feature	Celeron N2930	Core 2 Duo E7400
Socket	FCBGA1170	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333+25%	1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	16 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	4	16+300%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: Yes (Celeron N2930) vs true (Core 2 Duo E7400). The Celeron N2930 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics), while the Core 2 Duo E7400 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core 2 Duo E7400 rivals Athlon II X2 245.