| | | | | | |

Core 2 Duo E7400 vs Celeron G1610T


Description
The E7400 is based on Core architecture while the G1610T is based on Ivy Bridge.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the E7400 gets a score of 25.7 k points while the G1610T gets 38.6 k points.

Summarizing, the G1610T is 1.5 times faster than the E7400 . To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
1067a
306a9
Core
Wolfdale
Ivy Bridge
Architecture
Base frecuency
2.8 GHz
2.3 GHz
Socket
LGA 775
LGA 1155
Cores/Threads
2/2
2/2
TDP
65 W
35 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
32+32 kB
32+32 kB
Cache L2
3072 kB
256 kB
Cache L3
0 kB
2048 kB
Date
October 2008
December 2012
Mean monothread perf.
14.31k points
20.84k points
Mean multithread perf.
25.71k points
38.59k 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
E7400
G1610T
Test#1 (Integers)
2.54k
2.34k (x0.92)
Test#2 (FP)
6.56k
6.54k (x1)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2.73k
3k (x1.1)
Test#1 (Memory)
1.83k
2.74k (x1.49)
TOTAL
13.66k
14.62k (x1.07)

Multithread

E7400

G1610T
Test#1 (Integers)
5.08k
4.67k (x0.92)
Test#2 (FP)
13.07k
12.66k (x0.97)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.52k
5.95k (x1.08)
Test#1 (Memory)
1.62k
2.53k (x1.55)
TOTAL
25.29k
25.8k (x1.02)

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
E7400
G1610T
Test#1 (Integers)
3.19k
7.87k (x2.47)
Test#2 (FP)
7.02k
7.14k (x1.02)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2.71k
3.04k (x1.12)
Test#1 (Memory)
1.39k
2.79k (x2.01)
TOTAL
14.31k
20.84k (x1.46)

Multithread

E7400

G1610T
Test#1 (Integers)
6.02k
15.12k (x2.51)
Test#2 (FP)
13.23k
14.05k (x1.06)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.12k
5.94k (x1.16)
Test#1 (Memory)
1.34k
3.48k (x2.6)
TOTAL
25.71k
38.59k (x1.5)

Performance/W
E7400
G1610T
Test#1 (Integers)
93 points/W
432 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
204 points/W
401 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
79 points/W
170 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
21 points/W
99 points/W
TOTAL
396 points/W
1103 points/W

Performance/GHz
E7400
G1610T
Test#1 (Integers)
1139 points/GHz
3423 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
2507 points/GHz
3102 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
969 points/GHz
1323 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
496 points/GHz
1211 points/GHz
TOTAL
5111 points/GHz
9060 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.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

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.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4