Celeron G1610T vs Core 2 Quad Q8400
Description
The G1610T is based on Ivy Bridge architecture while the Q8400 is based on Core.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the G1610T gets a score of 38.6 k points while the Q8400 gets 51.9 k points.
Summarizing, the Q8400 is 1.3 times faster than the G1610T . To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the G1610T gets a score of 38.6 k points while the Q8400 gets 51.9 k points.
Summarizing, the Q8400 is 1.3 times faster than the G1610T . To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
306a9
1067a
Core
Ivy Bridge
Yorkfield
Base frecuency
2.3 GHz
2.666 GHz
Socket
LGA 1155
LGA 775
Cores/Threads
2/2
4/4
TDP
35 W
95 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
32+32 kB
128+128 kB
Cache L2
256 kB
4096 kB
Cache L3
2048 kB
0 kB
Date
December 2012
April 2009
Mean monothread perf.
20.84k points
14.04k points
Mean multithread perf.
38.59k points
51.92k points
Non-optimized benchmark
The benchmark in Mode 0 (FPU) measures cpu performance with non-optimized software. It uses the basic µinstructions from the i386 architecture with the i387 floating point unit. This mode is compatible with all CPUs so it's practical to compare very different CPUs
Monothread
G1610T
Q8400
Test#1 (Integers)
2.34k
2.44k (x1.04)
Test#2 (FP)
6.54k
6.24k (x0.95)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
3k
2.62k (x0.87)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.74k
1.43k (x0.52)
TOTAL
14.62k
12.73k (x0.87)
Multithread
G1610T
Q8400
Test#1 (Integers)
4.67k
9.71k (x2.08)
Test#2 (FP)
12.66k
24.81k (x1.96)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.95k
10.51k (x1.77)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.53k
2.03k (x0.8)
TOTAL
25.8k
47.05k (x1.82)
SSE3 optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode I (SSE) is optimized for the use of SIMD instructions with 128 bits register and the SSE set up to version 3. Nearly every modern CPU has support for this mode.
Monothread
G1610T
Q8400
Test#1 (Integers)
7.87k
3.08k (x0.39)
Test#2 (FP)
7.14k
6.8k (x0.95)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
3.04k
2.73k (x0.9)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.79k
1.42k (x0.51)
TOTAL
20.84k
14.04k (x0.67)
Multithread
G1610T
Q8400
Test#1 (Integers)
15.12k
12.25k (x0.81)
Test#2 (FP)
14.05k
26.84k (x1.91)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.94k
10.82k (x1.82)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.48k
2.02k (x0.58)
TOTAL
38.59k
51.92k (x1.35)
Performance/W
G1610T
Q8400
Test#1 (Integers)
432 points/W
129 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
401 points/W
283 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
170 points/W
114 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
99 points/W
21 points/W
TOTAL
1103 points/W
547 points/W
Performance/GHz
G1610T
Q8400
Test#1 (Integers)
3423 points/GHz
1157 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
3102 points/GHz
2551 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1323 points/GHz
1025 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1211 points/GHz
532 points/GHz
TOTAL
9060 points/GHz
5265 points/GHz
Monothread performance graph
Monothread performance graphics gives the performance vs time. They are useful to measure the time it takes to the CPU to reach the maximum performance.
Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.
Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.
Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]
Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]
Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]
Multithread performance graph
Multithread graphs measure the performance against a heavy load during certain time.
If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.
If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.
Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]
Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]
Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]
Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4