Core 2 Duo T8100 vs Celeron J4025
Aggregate performance score
Celeron J4025 outperforms Core 2 Duo T8100 by an impressive 94% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2526 | 2907 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.67 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Core 2 Duo |
| Power efficiency | 8.80 | 1.30 |
| Architecture codename | Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| Release date | 4 November 2019 (5 years ago) | 10 January 2008 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | $209 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 56 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 3 MB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 3 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 93 mm2 | 107 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 410 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1V-1.25V |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100 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 configuration | 1 | no data |
| Socket | FCBGA1090 | BGA479,PGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | + | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Smart Response | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| GPIO | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| MPX | + | - |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| SGX | Yes with Intel® ME | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel UHD Graphics 600 | no data |
| Max video memory | 8 GB | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 700 MHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 12 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| MIPI-DSI | + | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | + | no data |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096x2160@30Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 4096x2160@60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 4096x2160@60Hz | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 6 | no data |
| USB revision | 2.0/3.0 | no data |
| Total number of SATA ports | 2 | no data |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | 2 | no data |
| Number of USB ports | 8 | no data |
| Integrated LAN | - | no data |
| UART | + | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
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.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.93 | 0.48 |
| Recency | 4 November 2019 | 10 January 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 35 Watt |
Celeron J4025 has a 93.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 250% lower power consumption.
The Celeron J4025 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo T8100 in performance tests.
Note that Celeron J4025 is a desktop processor while Core 2 Duo T8100 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4025 and Core 2 Duo T8100, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
