Core 2 Duo T7400 vs Turion II M520
Primary details
Comparing Turion II M520 and Core 2 Duo T7400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2826 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Turion II | Intel Core 2 Duo |
| Power efficiency | 1.51 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Caspian (2009) | Merom (2006−2008) |
| Release date | 10 September 2009 (15 years ago) | 28 August 2006 (18 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $286 |
Detailed specifications
Turion II M520 and Core 2 Duo T7400 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 | 2.16 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 2.16 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3600 MHz | 667 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | no data | 143 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 291 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.1625V-1.3V |
Compatibility
Information on Turion II M520 and Core 2 Duo T7400 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | Socket S1 (s1g3) 638-pin | PBGA479,PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 34 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Turion II M520 and Core 2 Duo T7400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualization | no data |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| 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 | - |
Security technologies
Turion II M520 and Core 2 Duo T7400 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 Turion II M520 and Core 2 Duo T7400 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | 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.
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
| Recency | 10 September 2009 | 28 August 2006 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 34 Watt |
Turion II M520 has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.
Core 2 Duo T7400, on the other hand, has 2.9% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Turion II M520 and Core 2 Duo T7400. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Turion II M520 and Core 2 Duo T7400, 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.
