Celeron T3000 vs Pentium T3400

Celeron T3000

2 Cores2 Thrd35 WW2009

Pentium T3400

35 WW2008

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Celeron T3000

905

+7.1%

845

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 Celeron T3000 is positioned at rank 1188 and the Pentium T3400 is on rank 1194, so the Celeron T3000 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 Celeron T3000

#1176

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

4866%

#1177

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

4794%

#1178

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

4401%

#1179

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

4381%

#1180

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

4341%

#1182

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

4192%

#1183

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

4020%

#1184

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

4013%

#1185

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

3905%

#1188

Celeron T3000

MSRP: $150|Avg: $54

100%

#1189

Core m7-6Y75

MSRP: $393|Avg: $393

100%

#1190

Core M-5Y10

MSRP: $281|Avg: $20

97%

#1193

Celeron 900

MSRP: $86|Avg: $5

94%

#1194

Pentium T3400

MSRP: $150|Avg: $90

93%

#1195

Core 2 Solo SU3500

MSRP: $262|Avg: $15

93%

#1196

Core 2 Duo E8335

MSRP: $200|Avg: $50

91%

#1199

Celeron 560

MSRP: $89|Avg: $5

89%

#1200

Core i3-2312M

MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A

88%

#1201

Celeron 857

MSRP: $134|Avg: $10

87%

#1202

Celeron 925

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

87%

#1203

Core 2 Duo E8135

MSRP: $200|Avg: $15

85%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Pentium T3400

#1182

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

5211%

#1183

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

5135%

#1184

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

4714%

#1185

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

4693%

#1186

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

4650%

#1188

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

4490%

#1189

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

4306%

#1190

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

4298%

#1191

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

4183%

#1194

Pentium T3400

MSRP: $150|Avg: $90

100%

#1195

Core 2 Solo SU3500

MSRP: $262|Avg: $15

99%

#1196

Core 2 Duo E8335

MSRP: $200|Avg: $50

97%

#1199

Celeron 560

MSRP: $89|Avg: $5

95%

#1200

Core i3-2312M

MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A

94%

#1201

Celeron 857

MSRP: $134|Avg: $10

93%

#1202

Celeron 925

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

93%

#1203

Core 2 Duo E8135

MSRP: $200|Avg: $15

91%

#1204

Core 2 Duo U7700

MSRP: $262|Avg: $10

91%

#1205

Core Duo T2400

MSRP: $294|Avg: N/A

90%

#1206

Core 2 Duo U7600

MSRP: $250|Avg: $5

90%

#1207

Pentium M 735

MSRP: $294|Avg: N/A

88%

#1208

Core i7-620LM

MSRP: $300|Avg: N/A

87%

#1209

Core i7-740QM

MSRP: $378|Avg: N/A

87%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Analysis: Based on specifications, the Celeron T3000 shows stronger theoretical performance metrics.

Insight	Celeron T3000	Pentium T3400
Gaming	Balanced gaming performance	Balanced gaming performance
Workstation	✅ Better multi-core power	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price	✅ More affordable ($54)	⚠️ Higher cost ($90)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Legacy / 45 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Legacy / 65 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Efficiency: Even within a comparison of older hardware, the Celeron T3000 stands out as the superior choice. It is effectively 40% cheaper ($54 vs $90) while identifying as the stronger performer.

Insight	Celeron T3000	Pentium T3400
Cost Efficiency	✅ Better overall value (+79%)	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅ More affordable ($54)	⚠️ Higher cost ($90)

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.

Celeron T3000 Benchmark Check

Pentium T3400 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron T3000 and Pentium T3400

Celeron T3000

The Celeron T3000 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency: 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 905 points. Launch price was $69.

Pentium T3400

The Pentium T3400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2.16 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 845 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

In PassMark, the Celeron T3000 scores 905 against the Pentium T3400's 845 — a 6.9% lead for the Celeron T3000. Both processors carry 1 MB L2 Cache of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron T3000	Pentium T3400
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	—
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	2.16 GHz+20%
L3 Cache	1 MB L2 Cache	1 MB L2 Cache
Process	45 nm-31%	65 nm
PassMark	905+7%	845

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the PGA478 socket with PCIe 2.0.

Feature	Celeron T3000	Pentium T3400
Socket	PGA478	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0

💰

Value Analysis

The Celeron T3000 launched at $150 MSRP, while the Pentium T3400 debuted at $150. At current prices ($54 vs $90), the Celeron T3000 is $36 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron T3000 delivers 16.8 pts/$ vs 9.4 pts/$ for the Pentium T3400 — making the Celeron T3000 the 56.4% better value option.