
Core 2 Duo P8700

Xeon X3440
Core 2 Duo P8700 vs Xeon X3440 Performance Spectrum
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.
Core 2 Duo P8700 vs Xeon X3440 FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Apex Legends

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

Cyberpunk 2077

Dead by Daylight

Delta Force
Core 2 Duo P8700 vs Xeon X3440: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Core 2 Duo P8700
2009Why buy it
- ✅+1.3% higher PassMark.
- ✅Draws 3W instead of 95W, a 92W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon X3440 across 25 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 8 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon X3440, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 11.6 vs 12.9 PassMark/$ ($241 MSRP vs $215 MSRP).
Xeon X3440
2009Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +10.4% higher average FPS across 25 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 3 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 8 threads.
- ✅Costs $26 less on MSRP ($215 MSRP vs $241 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 10.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.9 vs 11.6 PassMark/$ ($215 MSRP vs $241 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (2,769 vs 2,805).
- ❌3066.7% higher power demand at 95W vs 3W.
Quick Answers
So, is Core 2 Duo P8700 better than Xeon X3440?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Core 2 Duo P8700 vs Xeon X3440 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core 2 Duo P8700
The Core 2 Duo P8700 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.53 GHz, with boost up to 2.53 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 3 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 2,805 points. Launch price was $209.

Xeon X3440
The Xeon X3440 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 September 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Lynnfield (2009−2010) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.53 GHz, with boost up to 2.93 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1156. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 2,769 points. Launch price was $215.
Processing Power
The Core 2 Duo P8700 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Xeon X3440 offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Xeon X3440 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.53 GHz on the Core 2 Duo P8700 versus 2.93 GHz on the Xeon X3440 — a 14.7% clock advantage for the Xeon X3440 (base: 2.53 GHz vs 2.53 GHz). The Core 2 Duo P8700 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Xeon X3440 uses Lynnfield (2009−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo P8700 scores 2,805 against the Xeon X3440's 2,769 — a 1.3% lead for the Core 2 Duo P8700. L3 cache: 3 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Duo P8700 vs 8 MB (total) on the Xeon X3440.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo P8700 | Xeon X3440 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 4 / 8+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.53 GHz | 2.93 GHz+16% |
| Base Clock | 2.53 GHz | 2.53 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 3 MB L2 Cache | 8 MB (total)+167% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+1100% | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Penryn (2008−2011) | Lynnfield (2009−2010) |
| PassMark | 2,805+1% | 2,769 |
Memory & Platform
The Core 2 Duo P8700 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Xeon X3440 uses LGA1156 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo P8700 | Xeon X3440 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | LGA1156 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | 1066 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: true (Core 2 Duo P8700) / not specified (Xeon X3440). Direct competitor: Core 2 Duo P8700 rivals Turion II Ultra M600.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo P8700 | Xeon X3440 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | true | — |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Core 2 Duo P8700 was priced at $241, while the Xeon X3440 came in at $215. On launch pricing ($241 vs $215), Xeon X3440 was $26 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core 2 Duo P8700 delivers 11.6 pts/$ vs 12.9 pts/$ for the Xeon X3440 — making the Xeon X3440 the 10.1% better value option.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo P8700 | Xeon X3440 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $241 | $215-11% |
| Performance per Dollar | 11.6 | 12.9+11% |
| Release Date | 2009 | 2009 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.














