Core 2 Duo E7400 vs Celeron N2940
Core 2 Duo E7400
Celeron N2940
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 N2940 is on rank 1085, so the Core 2 Duo E7400 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 N2940
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core 2 Duo E7400 | Celeron N2940 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Wolfdale (2008−2010) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core 2 Duo E7400 | Celeron N2940 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 N2940
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 N2940
The Celeron N2940 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.83 GHz, with boost up to 2.25 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,054 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Core 2 Duo E7400 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron N2940 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N2940 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E7400 versus 2.25 GHz on the Celeron N2940 — a 21.8% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo E7400 (base: 2.8 GHz vs 1.83 GHz). The Core 2 Duo E7400 uses the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron N2940 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo E7400 scores 1,043 against the Celeron N2940's 1,054 — a 1% lead for the Celeron N2940. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E7400 | Celeron N2940 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 4 / 4+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.8 GHz+24% | 2.25 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.8 GHz+53% | 1.83 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB (total)+500% | 512K (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 22 nm-51% |
| Architecture | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| PassMark | 1,043 | 1,054+1% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 240 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 850 |
Memory & Platform
The Core 2 Duo E7400 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron N2940 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 N2940 — 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 N2940) — 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 SoC (Celeron N2940).
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E7400 | Celeron N2940 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 N2940). The Celeron N2940 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Core 2 Duo E7400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2940 targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: Core 2 Duo E7400 rivals Athlon II X2 245; Celeron N2940 rivals AMD A6-6310.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E7400 | Celeron N2940 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | None | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | VT-x |
| Target Use | — | Budget Laptop |
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 N2940
