Core 2 Duo E4400 vs Celeron E3200
Core 2 Duo E4400
Celeron E3200
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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 Core 2 Duo E4400 is positioned at rank 1001 and the Celeron E3200 is on rank 683, so the Celeron E3200 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Duo E4400
Performance Per Dollar Celeron E3200
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core 2 Duo E4400 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) | ✅ More affordable ($5) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Allendale (2006−2009) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Wolfdale (2008−2010) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core 2 Duo E4400 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+298%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) | ✅ More affordable ($5) |
Performance Check
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core 2 Duo E4400 and Celeron E3200
Core 2 Duo E4400
The Core 2 Duo E4400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,095 points. Launch price was $249.
Celeron E3200
The Celeron E3200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,090 points. Launch price was $52.
Processing Power
Both the Core 2 Duo E4400 and Celeron E3200 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E4400 versus 2.4 GHz on the Celeron E3200 — a 18.2% clock advantage for the Celeron E3200 (base: 2 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core 2 Duo E4400 uses the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron E3200 uses Wolfdale (2008−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo E4400 scores 1,095 against the Celeron E3200's 1,090 — a 0.5% lead for the Core 2 Duo E4400. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 208 vs 340, a 48.2% lead for the Celeron E3200 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E4400 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2 GHz | 2.4 GHz+20% |
| Base Clock | 2 GHz | 2.4 GHz+20% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB (total) |
| Process | 65 nm | 45 nm-31% |
| Architecture | Allendale (2006−2009) | Wolfdale (2008−2010) |
| PassMark | 1,095 | 1,090 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 208 | 340+63% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 610 |
Memory & Platform
Both processors use the LGA775 socket with PCIe 1.1. Both support up to DDR2-1066 memory speed. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: RS600,Q965 (Core 2 Duo E4400) and G31,G41,P45 (Celeron E3200).
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E4400 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | LGA775 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-1066 | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: None (Core 2 Duo E4400) vs VT-x (Celeron E3200). Primary use case: Core 2 Duo E4400 targets Budget, Celeron E3200 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Core 2 Duo E4400 rivals Athlon II X2 240; Celeron E3200 rivals Pentium E5200.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E4400 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | None | VT-x |
| Target Use | Budget | Budget |
Value Analysis
The Core 2 Duo E4400 launched at $113 MSRP, while the Celeron E3200 debuted at $43. At current prices ($20 vs $5), the Celeron E3200 is $15 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Core 2 Duo E4400 delivers 54.8 pts/$ vs 218.0 pts/$ for the Celeron E3200 — making the Celeron E3200 the 119.7% better value option.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E4400 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $113 | $43-62% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | $5-75% |
| Performance per Dollar | 54.8 | 218.0+298% |
| Release Date | 2007 | 2009 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core 2 Duo E4400 and Celeron E3200
