Core 2 Duo E7200 vs Celeron N3150
Description
The E7200 is based on Core architecture while the N3150 is based on Airmont.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the E7200 gets a score of 25.2 k points while the N3150 gets 31.8 k points.
Summarizing, the N3150 is 1.3 times faster than the E7200 . To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the E7200 gets a score of 25.2 k points while the N3150 gets 31.8 k points.
Summarizing, the N3150 is 1.3 times faster than the E7200 . To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
10676
406c3
Core
Wolfdale
Braswell
Base frecuency
2.533 GHz
1.6 GHz
Boost frecuency
2.533 GHz
2.08 GHz
Socket
LGA 775
BGA1170
Cores/Threads
2/2
4/4
TDP
65 W
6 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
32+32 kB
4x32+4x24 kB
Cache L2
3072 kB
2x1024 kB
Cache L3
0 kB
kB
Date
April 2008
March 2015
Mean monothread perf.
13.46k points
9.21k points
Mean multithread perf.
25.21k points
31.8k 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
E7200
N3150
Test#1 (Integers)
2.33k
1.07k (x0.46)
Test#2 (FP)
5.96k
1.74k (x0.29)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2.5k
1.5k (x0.6)
Test#1 (Memory)
1.45k
1.46k (x1)
TOTAL
12.23k
5.78k (x0.47)
Multithread
E7200
N3150
Test#1 (Integers)
4.65k
3.99k (x0.86)
Test#2 (FP)
11.87k
6.31k (x0.53)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.01k
5.05k (x1.01)
Test#1 (Memory)
1.23k
2.65k (x2.15)
TOTAL
22.76k
18k (x0.79)
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
E7200
N3150
Test#1 (Integers)
2.93k
3.91k (x1.34)
Test#2 (FP)
6.48k
2.29k (x0.35)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2.6k
1.57k (x0.6)
Test#1 (Memory)
1.45k
1.44k (x0.99)
TOTAL
13.46k
9.21k (x0.68)
Multithread
E7200
N3150
Test#1 (Integers)
5.85k
14.78k (x2.53)
Test#2 (FP)
12.91k
8.62k (x0.67)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.22k
5.84k (x1.12)
Test#1 (Memory)
1.23k
2.57k (x2.08)
TOTAL
25.21k
31.8k (x1.26)
Performance/W
E7200
N3150
Test#1 (Integers)
90 points/W
2463 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
199 points/W
1437 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
80 points/W
973 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
19 points/W
428 points/W
TOTAL
388 points/W
5300 points/W
Performance/GHz
E7200
N3150
Test#1 (Integers)
1155 points/GHz
1880 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
2558 points/GHz
1102 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1028 points/GHz
755 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
574 points/GHz
692 points/GHz
TOTAL
5315 points/GHz
4429 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