Celeron E3300 vs Core 2 Duo E6550

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo E6550
2007
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.56
+12%
Celeron E3300
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.50

Core 2 Duo E6550 outperforms Celeron E3300 by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo E6550 and Celeron E3300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28192874
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.83
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency0.820.73
Architecture codenameConroe (2006−2007)Wolfdale (2008−2010)
Release dateJuly 2007 (17 years ago)30 August 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$70

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo E6550 and Celeron E3300 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed2.33 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.33 GHz2.5 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache4 MB1 MB (shared)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm45 nm
Die size143 mm282 mm2
Maximum core temperature72 °C74 °C
Number of transistors291 million228 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.5V0.85V-1.3625V

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo E6550 and Celeron E3300 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
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo E6550 and Celeron E3300. 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-no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Duo E6550 and Celeron E3300 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo E6550 and Celeron E3300 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo E6550 and Celeron E3300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Duo E6550 and Celeron E3300.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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.

Core 2 Duo E6550 0.56
+12%
Celeron E3300 0.50

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.

Core 2 Duo E6550 894
+12.5%
Celeron E3300 795

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.

Core 2 Duo E6550 260
+6.1%
Celeron E3300 245

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.

Core 2 Duo E6550 431
+9.1%
Celeron E3300 395

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.56 0.50
Chip lithography 65 nm 45 nm

Core 2 Duo E6550 has a 12% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron E3300, on the other hand, has a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Core 2 Duo E6550 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E3300 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E6550 and Celeron E3300, 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 Core 2 Duo E6550
Core 2 Duo E6550
Intel Celeron E3300
Celeron E3300

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.


3.3 363 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo E6550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 178 votes

Rate Celeron E3300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Duo E6550 or Celeron E3300, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.