Core 2 Duo E4400 vs Celeron N3050

Core 2 Duo E4400

2 Cores2 Thrd65 WWMax: 2 GHz2007

Celeron N3050

2 Cores2 Thrd6 WWMax: 2.16 GHz2015

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core 2 Duo E4400

2 / 2

1,095

0.0%

1,099

+0.4%

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 N3050 is on rank 744, so the Celeron N3050 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 Core 2 Duo E4400

Ryzen 9 7950X

MSRP: $194|Avg: $20

32169%

Core i9-10900T

MSRP: $120|Avg: $5

30396%

Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE

MSRP: $423|Avg: $5

22070%

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85

6649%

Ryzen 9 9950X

MSRP: $649|Avg: $129

5267%

Ryzen 5 8400F

MSRP: $303|Avg: $55

4607%

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700

MSRP: $299|Avg: $60

2639%

Ryzen 5 2600X

MSRP: $229|Avg: $55

2604%

Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

2371%

#10

Core Ultra 5 245KF

MSRP: $294|Avg: $189

2371%

#11

Ryzen 5 5500

MSRP: $159|Avg: $85

2345%

#12

Ryzen 5 3600

MSRP: $199|Avg: $80

2281%

#13

Core i3-9100E

MSRP: $202|Avg: $30

2249%

#14

Core Ultra 5 245K

MSRP: $319|Avg: $200

2240%

#15

Core i3-8300T

MSRP: $138|Avg: $25

2220%

#1001

Core 2 Duo E4400

MSRP: $113|Avg: $20

100%

#1002

Pentium D 915

MSRP: $74|Avg: $10

98%

#1003

Core 2 Quad Q9400

MSRP: $229|Avg: $25

97%

#1004

Core i5-655K

MSRP: $216|Avg: $55

96%

#1005

Celeron 450

MSRP: $53|Avg: $5

96%

#1006

Core 2 Duo E4600

MSRP: $133|Avg: $9.6

96%

#1008

Core i7-870S

MSRP: $300|Avg: $80

95%

#1009

Core 2 Duo E6540

MSRP: $163|Avg: $15

95%

#1010

Celeron 430

MSRP: $49|Avg: $10

94%

#1011

Athlon X2 BE-2300

MSRP: $100|Avg: $80

93%

#1012

Core i7-875K

MSRP: $353|Avg: $175

93%

#1013

Core i5-670

MSRP: $284|Avg: $100

93%

#1014

Core i5-680

MSRP: $294|Avg: $10

92%

#1015

Core 2 Duo E4300

MSRP: $113|Avg: $5

92%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron N3050

#731

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

1068%

#732

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

1052%

#733

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

966%

#734

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

961%

#735

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

953%

#737

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

920%

#738

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

882%

#739

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

881%

#740

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

857%

#743

Pentium 6805

MSRP: $161|Avg: $161

100%

#744

Celeron N3050

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#748

Ryzen 3 7320C

MSRP: $299|Avg: $200

100%

#756

Core i7-11370H

MSRP: $426|Avg: N/A

99%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Celeron N3050 (2015) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR3, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	Core 2 Duo E4400	Celeron N3050
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($20)	✅ More affordable ($0)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Allendale (2006−2009) / 65 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Braswell (2015−2016) / 14 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Core 2 Duo E4400 (2007) relies on 65 nm technology and DDR1, DDR2, DDR3, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	Core 2 Duo E4400	Celeron N3050
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($20)	✅ More affordable ($0)

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.

Core 2 Duo E4400 Benchmark Check

Celeron N3050 Benchmark Check

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core 2 Duo E4400 and Celeron N3050

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 N3050

The Celeron N3050 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 April 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.16 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,099 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core 2 Duo E4400 and Celeron N3050 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E4400 versus 2.16 GHz on the Celeron N3050 — a 7.7% clock advantage for the Celeron N3050 (base: 2 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The Core 2 Duo E4400 uses the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron N3050 uses Braswell (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo E4400 scores 1,095 against the Celeron N3050's 1,099 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron N3050. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 208 vs 221, a 6.1% lead for the Celeron N3050 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Core 2 Duo E4400	Celeron N3050
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2 GHz	2.16 GHz+8%
Base Clock	2 GHz+25%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB
Process	65 nm	14 nm-78%
Architecture	Allendale (2006−2009)	Braswell (2015−2016)
PassMark	1,095	1,099
Geekbench 6 Single	208	221+6%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	440

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 2 Duo E4400 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron N3050 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-1066 on the Core 2 Duo E4400 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron N3050 — the Celeron N3050 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core 2 Duo E4400 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Core 2 Duo E4400) vs 4 (Celeron N3050) — the Celeron N3050 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: RS600,Q965 (Core 2 Duo E4400) and Braswell SoC (Celeron N3050).

Feature	Core 2 Duo E4400	Celeron N3050
Socket	LGA775	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-1066	DDR3L-1600+50%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	❌	❌
PCIe Lanes	0	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: None (Core 2 Duo E4400) vs VT-x / EPT (Celeron N3050). The Celeron N3050 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Braswell)), while the Core 2 Duo E4400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core 2 Duo E4400 targets Budget, Celeron N3050 targets Netbook. Direct competitor: Core 2 Duo E4400 rivals Athlon II X2 240; Celeron N3050 rivals AMD E2-7110.