E-240 vs Core Solo T1200
E-240
Core Solo T1200
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 E-240 is positioned at rank 1169 and the Core Solo T1200 is on rank 1241, so the E-240 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar E-240
Performance Per Dollar Core Solo T1200
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | E-240 | Core Solo T1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | Balanced gaming performance | Balanced gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Zacate (2011−2013) / 40 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Yonah (2005−2006) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | E-240 | Core Solo T1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
Performance Check
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 E-240 and Core Solo T1200
E-240
The E-240 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 4 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Memory support: DDR3 Single-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 338 points. Launch price was $69.
Core Solo T1200
The Core Solo T1200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Yonah (2005−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: BGA479. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 355 points. Launch price was $249.
Processing Power
Both the E-240 and Core Solo T1200 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the E-240 versus 1.5 GHz on the Core Solo T1200 — identical boost frequencies. The E-240 uses the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture (40 nm), while the Core Solo T1200 uses Yonah (2005−2006) (65 nm). In PassMark, the E-240 scores 338 against the Core Solo T1200's 355 — a 4.9% lead for the Core Solo T1200. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | E-240 | Core Solo T1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 1.5 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 2 MB+300% |
| Process | 40 nm-38% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Zacate (2011−2013) | Yonah (2005−2006) |
| PassMark | 338 | 355+5% |
Memory & Platform
The E-240 uses the FT1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core Solo T1200 uses BGA479 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | E-240 | Core Solo T1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FT1 | BGA479 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on E-240 and Core Solo T1200
