Celeron N4000 vs Duo T2400
Primary details
Comparing Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 2505 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Core Duo | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | no data | 14.59 |
| Architecture codename | Yonah (2005−2006) | Goldmont Plus (2017) |
| Release date | January 2006 (18 years ago) | 11 December 2017 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $16 | $107 |
Detailed specifications
Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000 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 | 1.83 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.83 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | no data |
| Multiplier | no data | 11 |
| L1 cache | 0 KB | 112 KB |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 90 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 105 deg C |
| Number of transistors | 151 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 1.1625V - 1.3V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | PPGA478, PBGA479 | FCBGA1090 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | - | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 38.397 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics 600 |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 650 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| MIPI-DSI | no data | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 6 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | - |
| UART | 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.
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.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 6 Watt |
Celeron N4000 has a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 416.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core Duo T2400 and Celeron N4000, 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.
