Core 2 Quad Q8400
VS
Celeron 2957U

Core 2 Quad Q8400 vs Celeron 2957U

Intel

Core 2 Quad Q8400

4 Cores4 Thrd95 WWMax: 0.67 GHz2009
VS
Intel

Celeron 2957U

2 Cores2 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.4 GHz2014

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 Quad Q8400 is positioned at rank 975 and the Celeron 2957U is on rank 53, so the Celeron 2957U offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Quad Q8400

#1
Ryzen 9 7950X
MSRP: $194|Avg: $20
27488%
#2
Core i9-10900T
MSRP: $120|Avg: $5
25974%
#3
Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE
MSRP: $423|Avg: $5
18859%
#4
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85
5681%
#5
Ryzen 9 9950X
MSRP: $649|Avg: $129
4500%
#6
Ryzen 5 8400F
MSRP: $303|Avg: $55
3937%
#7
Ryzen 7 PRO 2700
MSRP: $299|Avg: $60
2255%
#8
Ryzen 5 2600X
MSRP: $229|Avg: $55
2225%
#9
Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G
MSRP: $150|Avg: $60
2026%
#10
Core Ultra 5 245KF
MSRP: $294|Avg: $189
2026%
#11
Ryzen 5 5500
MSRP: $159|Avg: $85
2003%
#12
Ryzen 5 3600
MSRP: $199|Avg: $80
1949%
#13
Core i3-9100E
MSRP: $202|Avg: $30
1922%
#14
Core Ultra 5 245K
MSRP: $319|Avg: $200
1914%
#15
Core i3-8300T
MSRP: $138|Avg: $25
1897%
#975
Core 2 Quad Q8400
MSRP: $183|Avg: $128
100%
#976
Pentium Dual-Core E2180
MSRP: $84|Avg: $5
99%
#977
Pentium E2180
MSRP: $84|Avg: $15
99%
#978
Pentium Dual-Core E2140
MSRP: $74|Avg: $5
97%
#979
Core i7-960
MSRP: $309|Avg: $110
97%
#980
E1-1500
MSRP: $60|Avg: $10
97%
#981
Core i5-2405S
MSRP: $309|Avg: $120
97%
#982
Celeron 420
MSRP: $39|Avg: $15
96%
#983
Athlon II X4 615e
MSRP: $186|Avg: $30
96%
#984
Athlon X2 BE-2350
MSRP: $90|Avg: $10
96%
#985
Core 2 Quad Q8300
MSRP: $179|Avg: $10
94%
#986
Core i7-860
MSRP: $284|Avg: $30
93%
#987
Core i7-870
MSRP: $300|Avg: $80
93%
#988
Athlon 64 X2 5000+
MSRP: $136|Avg: $42
92%
#989
Core i3-6102E
MSRP: $225|Avg: $35
92%
#990
Pentium Dual-Core E2160
MSRP: $84|Avg: $5
92%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2957U

#13
Ryzen 3 210
MSRP: $99|Avg: $99
96%
#14
Ryzen 5 PRO 230
MSRP: $150|Avg: $150
95%
#41
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
212%
#42
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
209%
#43
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
192%
#44
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
191%
#45
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
189%
#47
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
183%
#48
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
175%
#49
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
175%
#50
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
170%
#53
Celeron 2957U
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#65
Core i5-3320M
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
96%
#66
Core i7-4510U
MSRP: $393|Avg: N/A
95%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Trade-off: The Core 2 Quad Q8400 leads in gaming performance. However, the Celeron 2957U is the stronger candidate for professional workloads, offering 0% greater multi-core processing power.
InsightCore 2 Quad Q8400Celeron 2957U
Gaming
Superior gaming performance
Lower gaming performance
Workstation
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Better multi-core power
Price
⚠️ Higher cost ($128)
More affordable ($0)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Yorkfield (2007−2009) / 45 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Haswell (2013−2015) / 22 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

InsightCore 2 Quad Q8400Celeron 2957U
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
⚠️ Higher cost ($128)
More affordable ($0)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

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 Quad Q8400 and Celeron 2957U

Intel

Core 2 Quad Q8400

The Core 2 Quad Q8400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Yorkfield (2007−2009) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 0.67 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,076 points. Launch price was $249.

Intel

Celeron 2957U

The Celeron 2957U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,077 points. Launch price was $107.

Processing Power

The Core 2 Quad Q8400 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron 2957U offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Core 2 Quad Q8400 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 0.67 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q8400 versus 1.4 GHz on the Celeron 2957U — a 70.5% clock advantage for the Celeron 2957U (base: 2.66 GHz vs 1.4 GHz). The Core 2 Quad Q8400 uses the Yorkfield (2007−2009) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron 2957U uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Quad Q8400 scores 2,076 against the Celeron 2957U's 2,077 — a 0% lead for the Celeron 2957U. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 369 vs 284, a 26% lead for the Core 2 Quad Q8400 that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Core 2 Quad Q8400 vs 2 MB on the Celeron 2957U.

FeatureCore 2 Quad Q8400Celeron 2957U
Cores / Threads
4 / 4+100%
2 / 2
Boost Clock
0.67 GHz
1.4 GHz+109%
Base Clock
2.66 GHz+90%
1.4 GHz
L3 Cache
0 kB
2 MB
L2 Cache
4 MB (total)+700%
512 kB
Process
45 nm
22 nm-51%
Architecture
Yorkfield (2007−2009)
Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark
2,076
2,077
Cinebench R23 Multi
852
Geekbench 6 Single
369+30%
284
Geekbench 6 Multi
1,155
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 2 Quad Q8400 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 2957U uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3 1333 MHz on the Core 2 Quad Q8400 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron 2957U — the Core 2 Quad Q8400 supports 200% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Core 2 Quad Q8400) vs 10 (Celeron 2957U) — the Celeron 2957U offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel P45,Intel G41,Intel Q45,Intel X48,Intel G31 (Core 2 Quad Q8400) and Wildcat Point-LP (Celeron 2957U).

FeatureCore 2 Quad Q8400Celeron 2957U
Socket
LGA775
FCBGA1168
PCIe Generation
PCIe 1.1
PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed
DDR3 1333 MHz
DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity
16 GB
16 GB
RAM Channels
2
2
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
0
10
🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Core 2 Quad Q8400) vs VT-x (Celeron 2957U). The Celeron 2957U includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Haswell)), while the Core 2 Quad Q8400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core 2 Quad Q8400 targets Desktop, Celeron 2957U targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2957U rivals Pentium 2117U.

FeatureCore 2 Quad Q8400Celeron 2957U
Integrated GPU
No
Yes
IGPU Model
HD Graphics (Haswell)
Unlocked
No
No
AVX-512
No
No
Virtualization
true
VT-x
Target Use
Desktop
Budget