Core 2 Duo T5500 vs E1-1200

Core 2 Duo T5500 vs E1-1200 Performance Spectrum

Core 2 Duo T5500

2 / 2

1,660

0.0%

1,682

+1.3%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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 T5500 vs E1-1200 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 T5500 vs E1-1200: 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 T5500

2007

Why buy it

✅Draws 2W instead of 18W, a 16W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,660 vs 1,682).

E1-1200

2012

Why buy it

✅+1.3% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌800% higher power demand at 18W vs 2W.

Quick Answers

So, is E1-1200 better than Core 2 Duo T5500?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core 2 Duo T5500 is ahead with a 0.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, E1-1200 pulls ahead with 1.3% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, E1-1200 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

E1-1200 still makes the most sense overall. E1-1200 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1.3% better PassMark.

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

E1-1200 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2007) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core 2 Duo T5500 vs E1-1200 Technical Specifications

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

Core 2 Duo T5500

The Core 2 Duo T5500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.66 GHz, with boost up to 1.66 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 34 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,660 points. Launch price was $249.

E1-1200

The E1-1200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,682 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core 2 Duo T5500 and E1-1200 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.66 GHz on the Core 2 Duo T5500 versus 1.4 GHz on the E1-1200 — a 17% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo T5500. The Core 2 Duo T5500 uses the Merom (2006−2008) architecture (65 nm), while the E1-1200 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo T5500 scores 1,660 against the E1-1200's 1,682 — a 1.3% lead for the E1-1200. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Core 2 Duo T5500	E1-1200
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.66 GHz+19%	1.4 GHz
Base Clock	1.66 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	2 MB	512K (per core)+25500%
Process	65 nm	40 nm-38%
Architecture	Merom (2006−2008)	Zacate (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,660	1,682+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 2 Duo T5500 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the E1-1200 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.