Core 2 Duo SL9400 vs Core 2 Duo T6400

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 SL9400 vs Core 2 Duo T6400 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.

Core 2 Duo SL9400 vs Core 2 Duo T6400: 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 SL9400

2008

Why buy it

✅+1.4% higher PassMark.
✅+200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $284 MSRP, while Core 2 Duo T6400 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌200% higher power demand at 6W vs 2W.

Core 2 Duo T6400

2009

Why buy it

✅Draws 2W instead of 6W, a 4W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,115 vs 2,144).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 6 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is Core 2 Duo T6400 better than Core 2 Duo SL9400?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core 2 Duo T6400 is ahead with a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Duo SL9400 pulls ahead with 1.4% better PassMark. Core 2 Duo SL9400 also has the bigger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Duo SL9400 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core 2 Duo T6400 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Core 2 Duo T6400 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $284 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core 2 Duo SL9400 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core 2 Duo T6400 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2009 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core 2 Duo SL9400 vs Core 2 Duo T6400 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core 2 Duo SL9400

The Core 2 Duo SL9400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 August 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.86 GHz, with boost up to 1.86 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 6 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 2,144 points. Launch price was $284.

Core 2 Duo T6400

The Core 2 Duo T6400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 2,115 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core 2 Duo SL9400 and Core 2 Duo T6400 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.86 GHz on the Core 2 Duo SL9400 versus 2 GHz on the Core 2 Duo T6400 — a 7.3% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo T6400 (base: 1.86 GHz vs 2 GHz). Both are built on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture using a 45 nm process. In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo SL9400 scores 2,144 against the Core 2 Duo T6400's 2,115 — a 1.4% lead for the Core 2 Duo SL9400. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Duo SL9400 vs 2 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Duo T6400.

Feature	Core 2 Duo SL9400	Core 2 Duo T6400
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.86 GHz	2 GHz+8%
Base Clock	1.86 GHz	2 GHz+8%
L3 Cache	6 MB L2 Cache+200%	2 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	6 MB+200%	2 MB
Process	45 nm	45 nm
Architecture	Penryn (2008−2011)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	2,144+1%	2,115
Geekbench 6 Single	—	650
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,300

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 2 Duo SL9400 uses the BGA956 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core 2 Duo T6400 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1066 on the Core 2 Duo SL9400 versus DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Duo T6400 — the Core 2 Duo SL9400 supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core 2 Duo SL9400) vs 0 (Core 2 Duo T6400) — the Core 2 Duo SL9400 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GS45,GM45,PM45 (Core 2 Duo SL9400) and Intel GM45,Intel PM45 (Core 2 Duo T6400).

Feature	Core 2 Duo SL9400	Core 2 Duo T6400
Socket	BGA956	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066+33%	DDR2-800
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x (Core 2 Duo SL9400) vs No (Core 2 Duo T6400). Primary use case: Core 2 Duo SL9400 targets Mobile, Core 2 Duo T6400 targets Mobile.