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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Celeron N2940

2014

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 7W instead of 65W, a 58W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Core 2 Duo E7400 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌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 N2940.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,043 vs 1,054).
❌828.6% higher power demand at 65W vs 7W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2940 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron N2940

2014

Core 2 Duo E7400

2008

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 7W instead of 65W, a 58W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Core 2 Duo E7400 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅300% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Celeron N2940.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core 2 Duo E7400.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,043 vs 1,054).
❌828.6% higher power demand at 65W vs 7W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2940 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2940 better than Core 2 Duo E7400?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Core 2 Duo E7400 is ahead with a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N2940 pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N2940 is the better fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron N2940 still looks like the safer overall buy. Celeron N2940 is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you 1.1% better PassMark.

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

Celeron N2940 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Games Benchmarks

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.

Celeron N2940 Benchmark Check

Core 2 Duo E7400 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Celeron N2940	Core 2 Duo E7400
1080p
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS
1440p
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS
4K
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS

Open Celeron N2940 Open Core 2 Duo E7400

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Celeron N2940	Core 2 Duo E7400
1080p
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS
1440p
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS
4K
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS

Open Celeron N2940 Open Core 2 Duo E7400

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Celeron N2940	Core 2 Duo E7400
1080p
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS
1440p
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS
4K
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS

Open Celeron N2940 Open Core 2 Duo E7400

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Celeron N2940	Core 2 Duo E7400
1080p
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS
1440p
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS
4K
low	26 FPS	26 FPS
medium	26 FPS	26 FPS
high	26 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	26 FPS

Open Celeron N2940 Open Core 2 Duo E7400

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron N2940 and Core 2 Duo E7400

Celeron N2940

The Celeron N2940 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 2.25 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: 1,054 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 N2940 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core 2 Duo E7400 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N2940 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.25 GHz on the Celeron N2940 versus 2.8 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E7400 — a 21.8% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo E7400 (base: 1.83 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Celeron N2940 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 N2940 scores 1,054 against the Core 2 Duo E7400's 1,043 — a 1% lead for the Celeron N2940. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron N2940	Core 2 Duo E7400
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.25 GHz	2.8 GHz+24%
Base Clock	1.83 GHz	2.8 GHz+53%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	3 MB (total)+500%
Process	22 nm-51%	45 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	Wolfdale (2008−2010)
PassMark	1,054+1%	1,043
Geekbench 6 Single	240	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	850	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2940 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 N2940 versus 1066 on the Core 2 Duo E7400 — the Core 2 Duo E7400 supports 198.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core 2 Duo E7400 supports up to 16 of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N2940) 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 N2940) and P35,G31,G33,P45 (Core 2 Duo E7400).

Feature	Celeron N2940	Core 2 Duo E7400
Socket	FCBGA1170	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333	1066+35433%
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB+52428700%	16
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	4	16+300%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron N2940) vs true (Core 2 Duo E7400). The Celeron N2940 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Core 2 Duo E7400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2940 targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: Celeron N2940 rivals AMD A6-6310; Core 2 Duo E7400 rivals Athlon II X2 245.