Celeron N3150 vs Core 2 Duo E6400

The Celeron N3150 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core 2 Duo E6400 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N3150 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.08 GHz on the Celeron N3150 versus 2.13 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E6400 — a 2.4% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo E6400 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 2.13 GHz). The Celeron N3150 uses the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Core 2 Duo E6400 uses Conroe (2006−2007) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3150 scores 1,177 against the Core 2 Duo E6400's 1,175 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron N3150. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

The Celeron N3150 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Duo E6400 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1600 on the Celeron N3150 versus 1066 on the Core 2 Duo E6400 — the Celeron N3150 supports 40.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core 2 Duo E6400 supports up to 16 of RAM compared to 8 — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N3150) vs 16 (Core 2 Duo E6400) — the Core 2 Duo E6400 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: FCBGA1170 (Celeron N3150) and P35,G31,G33,P45 (Core 2 Duo E6400).

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support true virtualization. The Celeron N3150 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Braswell)), while the Core 2 Duo E6400 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N3150 rivals AMD E2-7110; Core 2 Duo E6400 rivals Athlon 64 X2 5400+.