Core 2 Duo E7400 vs Celeron J1850
Core 2 Duo E7400
Celeron J1850
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 E7400 is positioned at rank 544 and the Celeron J1850 is on rank 110, so the Celeron J1850 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 E7400
Performance Per Dollar Celeron J1850
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core 2 Duo E7400 | Celeron J1850 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($82) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Wolfdale (2008−2010) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-D (2013) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core 2 Duo E7400 | Celeron J1850 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($82) |
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 E7400 and Celeron J1850
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.
Celeron J1850
The Celeron J1850 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-D (2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,035 points. Launch price was $82.
Processing Power
The Core 2 Duo E7400 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron J1850 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron J1850 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E7400 versus 2 GHz on the Celeron J1850 — a 33.3% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo E7400 (base: 2.8 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core 2 Duo E7400 uses the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron J1850 uses Bay Trail-D (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo E7400 scores 1,043 against the Celeron J1850's 1,035 — a 0.8% lead for the Core 2 Duo E7400. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Core 2 Duo E7400 vs 2 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron J1850.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E7400 | Celeron J1850 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 4 / 4+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.8 GHz+40% | 2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.8 GHz+40% | 2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB L2 Cache |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB (total)+50% | 2 MB |
| Process | 45 nm | 22 nm-51% |
| Architecture | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | Bay Trail-D (2013) |
| PassMark | 1,043 | 1,035 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 180 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 450 |
Memory & Platform
The Core 2 Duo E7400 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron J1850 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1066 on the Core 2 Duo E7400 versus DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron J1850 — 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: 16 (Core 2 Duo E7400) vs 4 (Celeron J1850) — the Core 2 Duo E7400 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: P35,G31,G33,P45 (Core 2 Duo E7400) and N/A (SoC) (Celeron J1850).
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E7400 | Celeron J1850 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | 1066+35433% | DDR3L-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 | 8 GB+52428700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16+300% | 4 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Core 2 Duo E7400) vs VT-x (Celeron J1850). The Celeron J1850 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Core 2 Duo E7400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J1850 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Core 2 Duo E7400 rivals Athlon II X2 245; Celeron J1850 rivals Pentium J2900.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E7400 | Celeron J1850 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | None | HD Graphics (Bay Trail) |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | VT-x |
| Target Use | — | Low Power |
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 E7400 and Celeron J1850
