Celeron G1830 vs Core 2 Duo E8400
Aggregate performance score
Celeron G1830 outperforms Core 2 Duo E8400 by a substantial 35% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Duo E8400 and Celeron G1830 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2566 | 2367 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.86 | 1.23 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Architecture codename | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | Haswell (2013−2015) |
| Release date | 1 January 2008 (16 years ago) | 1 December 2013 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $85 |
| Current price | $73 | $65 (0.8x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Core 2 Duo E8400 has 51% better value for money than Celeron G1830.
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Duo E8400 and Celeron G1830 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 | 3 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 104 mm2 | 177 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 410 million | 1,400 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Duo E8400 and Celeron G1830 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 | 775 | 1150 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 54 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo E8400 and Celeron G1830. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo E8400 and Celeron G1830 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo E8400 and Celeron G1830. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.3 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Intel HD (Haswell) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Duo E8400 and Celeron G1830.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
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.
Celeron G1830 outperforms Core 2 Duo E8400 by 35% 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%
Celeron G1830 outperforms Core 2 Duo E8400 by 34% in Passmark.
3DMark Fire Strike Physics
Benchmark coverage: 4%
Celeron G1830 outperforms Core 2 Duo E8400 by 13% in 3DMark Fire Strike Physics.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.75 | 1.01 |
| Recency | 1 January 2008 | 1 December 2013 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 54 Watt |
Celeron G1830 has a 34.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 20.4% lower power consumption.
The Celeron G1830 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 Celeron G1830, 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.
