Core 2 Extreme X7800 vs E2-3800

Core 2 Extreme X7800 vs E2-3800 Performance Spectrum

Core 2 Extreme X7800

2 / 2

1,138

+0.2%

1,136

0.0%

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

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 Extreme X7800 vs E2-3800 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 Extreme X7800 vs E2-3800: 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 Extreme X7800

2007

Why buy it

✅Draws 4W instead of 15W, a 11W reduction.
✅300% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while E2-3800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

E2-3800

2013

Why buy it

✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 8280, while Core 2 Extreme X7800 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,136 vs 1,138).
❌Launch MSRP is still $100 MSRP, while Core 2 Extreme X7800 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌275% higher power demand at 15W vs 4W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core 2 Extreme X7800 better than E2-3800?

Yes. Core 2 Extreme X7800 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.2% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core 2 Extreme X7800 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.8% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Extreme X7800 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Core 2 Extreme X7800 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Core 2 Extreme X7800 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. E2-3800 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?

E2-3800 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2007). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core 2 Extreme X7800 vs E2-3800 Technical Specifications

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

Core 2 Extreme X7800

The Core 2 Extreme X7800 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 17 July 2007 (18 years ago). It is based on the Merom XE (2007) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 44 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,138 points. Launch price was $851.

E2-3800

The E2-3800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.3 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,136 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core 2 Extreme X7800 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the E2-3800 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the E2-3800 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Core 2 Extreme X7800 versus 1.3 GHz on the E2-3800 — a 66.7% clock advantage for the Core 2 Extreme X7800. The Core 2 Extreme X7800 uses the Merom XE (2007) architecture (65 nm), while the E2-3800 uses Kabini (2013−2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Extreme X7800 scores 1,138 against the E2-3800's 1,136 — a 0.2% lead for the Core 2 Extreme X7800.

Feature	Core 2 Extreme X7800	E2-3800
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz+100%	1.3 GHz
Base Clock	2.6 GHz	—
L3 Cache	4 MB L2 Cache	—
L2 Cache	4 MB+100%	2048 kB
Process	65 nm	28 nm-57%
Architecture	Merom XE (2007)	Kabini (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,138	1,136
Geekbench 6 Single	—	136
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	389

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 2 Extreme X7800 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the E2-3800 uses FT3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-667 on the Core 2 Extreme X7800 versus DDR3-1600 on the E2-3800 — the E2-3800 supports 139.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The E2-3800 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core 2 Extreme X7800) vs 1 (E2-3800). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core 2 Extreme X7800) vs 4 (E2-3800) — the Core 2 Extreme X7800 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Socket P (Core 2 Extreme X7800) and SoC (E2-3800).

Feature	Core 2 Extreme X7800	E2-3800
Socket	PGA478	FT3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-667	DDR3-1600+140%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	16 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16+300%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x (Core 2 Extreme X7800) vs Yes (E2-3800). The E2-3800 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 8280), while the Core 2 Extreme X7800 requires a dedicated GPU.