Core 2 Duo P8400 vs Core i7-4700EQ

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-4700EQ
2013
4 cores / 8 threads, 47 Watt
3.09
+531%
Core 2 Duo P8400
2008, $209
2 cores / 2 threads, 25 Watt
0.49

Core i7-4700EQ outperforms Core 2 Duo P8400 by a whopping 531% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18463178
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.02
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Core 2 Duo
Power efficiency2.780.83
DesignerIntelIntel
ManufacturerIntelno data
Architecture codenameCrystalwell (2013−2014)Penryn (2008−2011)
Release date27 May 2013 (12 years ago)15 July 2008 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$209

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Core i7-4700EQ and Core 2 Duo P8400 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads82
Base clock speed2.4 GHz2.26 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz2.26 GHz
Bus rateno data1066 MHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)3 MB
L3 cache8192 KB (shared)3 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography22 nm45 nm
Die size177 mm2107 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)100 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,400 million410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.05V-1.15V

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-4700EQ and Core 2 Duo P8400 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 configuration1no data
SocketIntel BGA1364BGA479,PBGA479,PGA478
Power consumption (TDP)47 Watt25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-4700EQ and Core 2 Duo P8400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
TSX+-
Idle Statesno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Core i7-4700EQ and Core 2 Duo P8400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-4700EQ and Core 2 Duo P8400 are enumerated here.

VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-4700EQ and Core 2 Duo P8400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD 4600no data

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

i7-4700EQ 3.09
+531%
Core 2 Duo P8400 0.49

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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.

i7-4700EQ 5417
+526%
Samples: 32
Core 2 Duo P8400 866
Samples: 1298

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.

i7-4700EQ 693
+152%
Core 2 Duo P8400 275

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.

i7-4700EQ 2463
+455%
Core 2 Duo P8400 444

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.09 0.49
Recency 27 May 2013 15 July 2008
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 8 2
Chip lithography 22 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 47 Watt 25 Watt

i7-4700EQ has a 530.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 104.5% more advanced lithography process.

Core 2 Duo P8400, on the other hand, has 88% lower power consumption.

The Intel Core i7-4700EQ is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core 2 Duo P8400 in performance tests.

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 i7-4700EQ
Core i7-4700EQ
Intel Core 2 Duo P8400
Core 2 Duo P8400

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Core i7-4700EQ on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 108 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo P8400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Core i7-4700EQ and Core 2 Duo P8400, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.