Core 2 Duo T8300 vs Phenom II X2 N620
Aggregate performance score
Core 2 Duo T8300 outperforms Phenom II X2 N620 by a moderate 13% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X2 N620 and Core 2 Duo T8300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2478 | 2405 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 2x AMD Phenom II | Intel Core 2 Duo |
| Architecture codename | Champlain (2010−2011) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| Release date | 12 May 2010 (14 years ago) | 10 January 2008 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $241 |
| Current price | no data | $106 (0.4x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X2 N620 and Core 2 Duo T8300 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 | no data | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Bus support | 3600 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 3 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 3 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 107 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 410 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1V-1.25V |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X2 N620 and Core 2 Duo T8300 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.
| Socket | S1 | BGA479,PGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X2 N620 and Core 2 Duo T8300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | DDR3 memory controller, HyperTransport 3.0, SSE4A, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Vurtualization | no data |
| VirusProtect | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Phenom II X2 N620 and Core 2 Duo T8300 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 Phenom II X2 N620 and Core 2 Duo T8300 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X2 N620 and Core 2 Duo T8300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | 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.
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 T8300 outperforms Phenom II X2 N620 by 13% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Phenom II X2 N620 outperforms Core 2 Duo T8300 by 17% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Phenom II X2 N620 outperforms Core 2 Duo T8300 by 38% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
Core 2 Duo T8300 outperforms Phenom II X2 N620 by 5% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Core 2 Duo T8300 outperforms Phenom II X2 N620 by 1% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Phenom II X2 N620 outperforms Core 2 Duo T8300 by 6% in 3DMark06 CPU.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| Recency | 12 May 2010 | 10 January 2008 |
The Core 2 Duo T8300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom II X2 N620 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X2 N620 and Core 2 Duo T8300, 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.
