Core 2 Duo E8400 vs Celeron E3300
Core 2 Duo E8400
Celeron E3300
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 E8400 is positioned at rank 508 and the Celeron E3300 is on rank 724, so the Core 2 Duo E8400 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 E8400
Performance Per Dollar Celeron E3300
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core 2 Duo E8400 | Celeron E3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Wolfdale (2008−2010) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Wolfdale (2008−2010) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core 2 Duo E8400 | Celeron E3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
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 E8400 and Celeron E3300
Core 2 Duo E8400
The Core 2 Duo E8400 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 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 6 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,165 points. Launch price was $249.
Celeron E3300
The Celeron E3300 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 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 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: 1,155 points. Launch price was $70.
Processing Power
Both the Core 2 Duo E8400 and Celeron E3300 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E8400 versus 2.5 GHz on the Celeron E3300 — a 18.2% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo E8400 (base: 3 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). Both are built on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture using a 45 nm process. In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo E8400 scores 1,165 against the Celeron E3300's 1,155 — a 0.9% lead for the Core 2 Duo E8400. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E8400 | Celeron E3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 3 GHz+20% | 2.5 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3 GHz+20% | 2.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB (total)+500% | 1 MB (total) |
| Process | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | Wolfdale (2008−2010) |
| PassMark | 1,165 | 1,155 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 347 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 624 |
Memory & Platform
Both processors use the LGA775 socket with PCIe 1.1. Maximum memory speed reaches 1333 on the Core 2 Duo E8400 versus DDR3-1066 on the Celeron E3300 — the Core 2 Duo E8400 supports 199.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core 2 Duo E8400 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 E8400) vs 0 (Celeron E3300) — the Core 2 Duo E8400 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: P35,G31,G33,P45 (Core 2 Duo E8400) and G31,G41,P45 (Celeron E3300).
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E8400 | Celeron E3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | LGA775 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | 1333+44333% | DDR3-1066 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 | 8 GB+52428700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Core 2 Duo E8400) vs VT-x (Celeron E3300). Primary use case: Celeron E3300 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Core 2 Duo E8400 rivals Phenom II X2 550; Celeron E3300 rivals Pentium E5200.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E8400 | Celeron E3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | VT-x |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
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 E8400 and Celeron E3300
