Core 2 Duo E6400 vs Celeron D 346

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron D 346 and Core 2 Duo E6400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated2902
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiencyno data0.71
Architecture codenamePrescott (2001−2005)Conroe (2006−2007)
Release dateOctober 2004 (20 years ago)July 2006 (18 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron D 346 and Core 2 Duo E6400 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores1 (Single-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads12
Base clock speed3.06 GHz2.13 GHz
Boost clock speed3.06 GHz2.13 GHz
Bus rateno data1066 MHz
L1 cache16 KB64 KB
L2 cache256 KB2 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography90 nm65 nm
Die size109 mm2143 mm2
Maximum core temperature68 °C61 °C
Number of transistors125 million291 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1.25V-1.4V0.85V-1.5V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron D 346 and Core 2 Duo E6400 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketPLGA775LGA775,PLGA775
Power consumption (TDP)84 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron D 346 and Core 2 Duo E6400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-+
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Demand Based Switching--
PAE32 Bitno data
FSB parity--

Security technologies

Celeron D 346 and Core 2 Duo E6400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron D 346 and Core 2 Duo E6400 are enumerated here.

VT-x-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron D 346 and Core 2 Duo E6400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 2
Chip lithography 90 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 84 Watt 65 Watt

Core 2 Duo E6400 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 38.5% more advanced lithography process, and 29.2% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron D 346 and Core 2 Duo E6400. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron D 346 and Core 2 Duo E6400, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron D 346
Celeron D 346
Intel Core 2 Duo E6400
Core 2 Duo E6400

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.9 61 vote

Rate Celeron D 346 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 151 vote

Rate Core 2 Duo E6400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron D 346 or Core 2 Duo E6400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.