E1-2200 vs Pentium T3400

AMD

E1-2200

2 Cores2 Thrd9 WWMax: 1.05 GHz2013
VS
Intel

Pentium T3400

35 WW2008

E1-2200 vs Pentium T3400 Performance Spectrum

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.

E1-2200 vs Pentium T3400 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.

E1-2200 vs Pentium T3400: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

E1-2200

2013

Why buy it

  • βœ…Draws 9W instead of 35W, a 26W reduction.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Pentium T3400 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • ❌Lower PassMark (802 vs 845).

Pentium T3400

2008

Why buy it

  • βœ…Better for gaming: +5.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Launch MSRP is still $150 MSRP, while E1-2200 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
  • ❌288.9% higher power demand at 35W vs 9W.

Quick Answers

So, is Pentium T3400 better than E1-2200?
Yes. Pentium T3400 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 5.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 5.4% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.
Which one is better for gaming?
If gaming is the priority, Pentium T3400 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 5.0% 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, Pentium T3400 is the stronger fit. You are getting 5.4% better PassMark.
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Pentium T3400 is the better buy right now. Pentium T3400 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $150 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 5.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (5.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
E1-2200 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

E1-2200 vs Pentium T3400 Technical Specifications

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

AMD

E1-2200

The E1-2200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013βˆ’2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.05 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 9 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 802 points. Launch price was $50.

Intel

Pentium T3400

The Pentium T3400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2.16 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 845 points. Launch price was $69.

⚑

Processing Power

The E1-2200 is built on the Kabini (2013βˆ’2014) architecture. In PassMark, the E1-2200 scores 802 against the Pentium T3400's 845 β€” a 5.2% lead for the Pentium T3400.

FeatureE1-2200Pentium T3400
Cores / Threads
2 / 2
β€”
Boost Clock
1.05 GHz
β€”
Base Clock
β€”
2.16 GHz
L3 Cache
β€”
1 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache
1024 kB
β€”
Process
28 nm-57%
65 nm
Architecture
Kabini (2013βˆ’2014)
β€”
PassMark
802
845+5%
🧠

Memory & Platform

The E1-2200 uses the FT3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Pentium T3400 uses PGA478 (PCIe 2.0) β€” making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

FeatureE1-2200Pentium T3400
Socket
FT3
PGA478
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 2.0