Athlon II X3 435 vs Core 2 Duo E8400
Aggregate performance score
Athlon II X3 435 outperforms Core 2 Duo E8400 by a considerable 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Duo E8400 and Athlon II X3 435 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2562 | 2330 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.86 | 6.72 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Architecture codename | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | Rana (2009−2011) |
| Release date | 1 January 2008 (16 years ago) | October 2009 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $160 |
| Current price | $61 | $17.65 (0.1x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Athlon II X3 435 has 261% better value for money than Core 2 Duo E8400.
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Duo E8400 and Athlon II X3 435 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) | 3 (Tri-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 3 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 104 mm2 | 169 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 72 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 410 million | 300 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.3625V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Duo E8400 and Athlon II X3 435 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 | 1 |
| Socket | LGA775 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo E8400 and Athlon II X3 435. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Core 2 Duo E8400 and Athlon II X3 435 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo E8400 and Athlon II X3 435 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo E8400 and Athlon II X3 435. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Duo E8400 and Athlon II X3 435.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 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.
Athlon II X3 435 outperforms Core 2 Duo E8400 by 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Athlon II X3 435 outperforms Core 2 Duo E8400 by 41% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core 2 Duo E8400 outperforms Athlon II X3 435 by 14% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Athlon II X3 435 outperforms Core 2 Duo E8400 by 36% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.75 | 1.06 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 3 |
| Threads | 2 | 3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
The Athlon II X3 435 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo E8400 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E8400 and Athlon II X3 435, 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.
