Core 2 Solo SU3300 vs Celeron Dual-Core T3100
Aggregate performance score
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 outperforms Core 2 Solo SU3300 by a whopping 347% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2932 | 3545 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron Dual-Core | Intel Core 2 Solo |
| Power efficiency | 0.81 | 1.15 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Penryn (2008−2011) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| Release date | 1 September 2009 (16 years ago) | 20 August 2008 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $262 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Core 2 Solo SU3300 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.9 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 3 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | 107 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 410 Million | 410 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Core 2 Solo SU3300 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.
| Socket | BGA479, PGA478 | BGA956 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 5.5 Watt |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.67 | 0.15 |
| Recency | 1 September 2009 | 20 August 2008 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 5 Watt |
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 has a 346.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Core 2 Solo SU3300, on the other hand, has 600% lower power consumption.
The Intel Celeron Dual-Core T3100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core 2 Solo SU3300 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
