Celeron 2950M vs Core 2 Duo SU9400

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo SU9400
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.32
Celeron 2950M
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 37 Watt
0.78
+144%

Celeron 2950M outperforms Core 2 Duo SU9400 by a whopping 144% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo SU9400 and Celeron 2950M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30802626
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core 2 DuoIntel Celeron
Power efficiency3.032.00
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Haswell (2013−2015)
Release date20 August 2008 (16 years ago)1 September 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$262$75

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo SU9400 and Celeron 2950M 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 speed1.4 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.4 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate800 MHz5 GT/s
L1 cache128 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache3 MB256K (per core)
L3 cache3 MB L2 Cache2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm22 nm
Die size107 mm2118 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data105 °C
Number of transistors410 Million1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1.05V-1.15Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo SU9400 and Celeron 2950M 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 configurationno data1
SocketBGA956FCPGA946
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt37 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo SU9400 and Celeron 2950M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Duo SU9400 and Celeron 2950M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo SU9400 and Celeron 2950M are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-dno data-
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo SU9400 and Celeron 2950M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® HD Graphics for 4th Generation Intel® Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1.1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Duo SU9400 and Celeron 2950M integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
VGAno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Duo SU9400 and Celeron 2950M.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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 SU9400 0.32
Celeron 2950M 0.78
+144%

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 SU9400 511
Celeron 2950M 1234
+141%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.32 0.78
Recency 20 August 2008 1 September 2013
Chip lithography 45 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 37 Watt

Core 2 Duo SU9400 has 270% lower power consumption.

Celeron 2950M, on the other hand, has a 143.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 104.5% more advanced lithography process.

The Celeron 2950M is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo SU9400 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo SU9400 and Celeron 2950M, 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 SU9400
Core 2 Duo SU9400
Intel Celeron 2950M
Celeron 2950M

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.


2.9 8 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo SU9400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 13 votes

Rate Celeron 2950M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Duo SU9400 or Celeron 2950M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.