Celeron 847E vs Core 2 Duo T9900

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo T9900
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.75
+103%
Celeron 847E
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.37

Core 2 Duo T9900 outperforms Celeron 847E by a whopping 103% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo T9900 and Celeron 847E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26693046
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core 2 DuoIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.032.06
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release date2 June 2009 (15 years ago)no data
Launch price (MSRP)$530$111

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo T9900 and Celeron 847E 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 speed3.06 GHzno data
Boost clock speed0.07 GHz1.1 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 2.0
Bus rate1066 MHz4 × 5 GT/s
Multiplierno data11
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache6 MB (shared)512 KB
L3 cache6 MB L2 Cache2 MB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size107 mm2131 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors410 million504 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1.05V-1.2125Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo T9900 and Celeron 847E 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketBGA479,PGA478no data
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo T9900 and Celeron 847E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

FMA-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Demand Based Switching-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Duo T9900 and Celeron 847E 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 T9900 and Celeron 847E are enumerated here.

VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo T9900 and Celeron 847E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR2, DDR3DDR3-1333
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21.335 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)

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 T9900 0.75
+103%
Celeron 847E 0.37

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 T9900 1189
+104%
Celeron 847E 584

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 T9900 399
+110%
Celeron 847E 190

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 T9900 641
+89.6%
Celeron 847E 338

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 0.37
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 17 Watt

Core 2 Duo T9900 has a 102.7% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron 847E, on the other hand, has a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 105.9% lower power consumption.

The Core 2 Duo T9900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 847E in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo T9900 and Celeron 847E, 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 T9900
Core 2 Duo T9900
Intel Celeron 847E
Celeron 847E

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.


4.3 136 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo T9900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 3 votes

Rate Celeron 847E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Duo T9900 or Celeron 847E, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.