Notebookcheck Logo

Intel Core 2 Duo T5800 vs Intel Core 2 Duo T7250

Intel Core 2 Duo T5800

► remove from comparison

Der Intel Core 2 Duo T5800 ist ein Einstiegs Doppelkernprozessor basierend auf den alten Merom Kern mit lediglich 2 MB Level 2 Cache. Er bietet keine Virtualisierungsfunktionen und ist mit 2 GHz relativ langsam getaktet.

Intel Core 2 Duo T7250

► remove from comparison

Der Intel Core 2 Duo T7250 war zur Zeit des Erscheinens ein Mittelklasse Doppelkernprozessor für Notebooks. Er basiert auf den älteren Merom Kern (später von dem schnelleren Penryn Kern abgelöst) und bietet die nur den halbierten Level 2 Cache mit 2 MB. Wie der T7200 bietet der T7250 Virtualization VT-x Funktionen, jedoch ist der T7200 aufgrund des 4 MB Cache etwas schneller (trotz des langsameren FSB). Durch die geringere Kernspannung, dürfte der T7250 jedoch etwas sparsamer sein.

ModelIntel Core 2 Duo T5800Intel Core 2 Duo T7250
SeriesIntel Core 2 DuoIntel Core 2 Duo
CodenameMeromMerom
Serie: Core 2 Duo Merom
Intel Core 2 Duo T7800 compare2.6 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7700 compare2.4 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7600 compare2.33 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7500 compare2.2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7400 compare2.16 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5900 compare2.2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7300 compare2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5850 compare2.1 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5870 compare2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7200 compare2 GHz2 / 2
» Intel Core 2 Duo T58002 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T72502 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5750 compare2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo L7700 compare1.8 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo SP7700 compare1.8 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7100 compare1.8 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5600 compare1.83 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5550 compare1.83 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5500 compare1.66 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5300 compare1.73 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo SP7500 compare1.6 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5200 compare1.66 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo L7500 compare1.6 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo L7300 compare1.4 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo L7100 compare1.2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7800 compare2.6 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7700 compare2.4 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7600 compare2.33 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7500 compare2.2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7400 compare2.16 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5900 compare2.2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7300 compare2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5850 compare2.1 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5870 compare2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7200 compare2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T58002 GHz2 / 2
» Intel Core 2 Duo T72502 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5750 compare2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo L7700 compare1.8 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo SP7700 compare1.8 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T7100 compare1.8 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5600 compare1.83 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5550 compare1.83 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5500 compare1.66 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5300 compare1.73 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo SP7500 compare1.6 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo T5200 compare1.66 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo L7500 compare1.6 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo L7300 compare1.4 GHz2 / 2
Intel Core 2 Duo L7100 compare1.2 GHz2 / 2
Clock2000 MHz2000 MHz
FSB800800
L2 Cache2 MB2 MB
Cores / Threads2 / 22 / 2
TDP35 Watt35 Watt
Transistors291 Million291 Million
65 nm65 nm1.075V-1.175V
Die Size143 mm2143 mm2
max. Temp.85 °C100 °C
SocketPPGA478PBGA479, PPGA478
FeaturesMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology (EIST), Intel 64, XD bit (an NX bit implementation), iAMT2 (Intel Active Management), TXTVirtualization, Intel 64, Enhanced Speedstep, Execute Disable Bit
Architecturex86x86
Announced
ManufacturerIntel Core 2 Duo T5800Intel Core 2 Duo T7250

Benchmarks

Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
min: 1988     avg: 2000     median: 2000 (18%)     max: 2013 Points
min: 1999     avg: 2062     median: 2072.5 (19%)     max: 2093 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
min: 3714     avg: 3755     median: 3716 (5%)     max: 3835 Points
min: 3729     avg: 3771     median: 3762.5 (5%)     max: 3822 Points
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
100%
1 T7250 +
45 s (9%)
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
min: 1629     avg: 1640     median: 1639.5 (3%)     max: 1650 Points
min: 1608     avg: 1678     median: 1705 (4%)     max: 1751 Points
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
min: 28.06     avg: 28.5     median: 28.5 (6%)     max: 28.9 s
min: 27     avg: 29.5     median: 29.5 (6%)     max: 32 s
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
min: 69.6     avg: 90.3     median: 90.3 (4%)     max: 111 s
min: 65     avg: 69.5     median: 69.5 (3%)     max: 74 s
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
min: 1511     avg: 1521     median: 1520.5 (7%)     max: 1530 s
min: 1432     avg: 1544     median: 1544 (7%)     max: 1656 s
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS) - SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
min: 11028     avg: 14012     median: 14011.5 (7%)     max: 16995 MIPS
min: 18085     avg: 18213     median: 18213 (9%)     max: 18341 MIPS
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS) - SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
min: 7694     avg: 10270     median: 10270 (8%)     max: 12846 MFLOPS
min: 11961     avg: 12395     median: 12395 (10%)     max: 12829 MFLOPS
PCMark 05 - PCMark 05 - Standard
min: 4286     avg: 4884     median: 5025 (32%)     max: 5340 Points
min: 3715     avg: 4317     median: 4366 (27%)     max: 4794 Points
Windows Vista Experience Index - Windows Vista Leistungsindex - Prozessor
4.9 Points (70%)
4.9 Points (70%)
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. CPU no Physx
100%
1 T5800 +
3533 Points (4%)

Average Benchmarks Intel Core 2 Duo T5800 → 100% n=10

Average Benchmarks Intel Core 2 Duo T7250 → 105% n=10

- Bereich der Benchmarkergebnisse für diese Grafikkarte
- Durchschnittliche Benchmarkergebnisse für diese Grafikkarte
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2022, 2021
v1.17
log 13. 17:45:05

#0 checking url part for id 438 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 340 +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Thu, 11 Aug 2022 13:13:36 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.002s

#5 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.002s ... 0.003s

#6 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.003s

#7 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.003s

#8 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#9 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#10 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#11 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#12 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#13 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#14 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#15 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#16 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#17 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#18 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#19 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#20 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#21 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#22 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#23 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#24 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#25 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#26 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#27 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#28 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#29 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#30 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#31 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#32 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#33 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.004s

#34 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#35 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#36 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#37 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#38 composed specs +0s ... 0.004s

#39 did output specs +0s ... 0.004s

#40 getting avg benchmarks for device 438 +0s ... 0.005s

#41 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.001s ... 0.005s

#42 got single benchmarks 438 +0.018s ... 0.023s

#43 getting avg benchmarks for device 340 +0s ... 0.024s

#44 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.024s

#45 got single benchmarks 340 +0.019s ... 0.044s

#46 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.044s

#47 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.002s ... 0.045s

#48 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.045s

#49 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.045s

#50 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.046s

#51 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.046s

#52 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.046s

#53 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.046s

#54 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.046s

#55 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.046s

#56 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.046s

#57 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.046s

#58 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.046s

#59 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.047s

#60 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.047s

#61 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.047s

#62 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.047s

#63 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.047s

#64 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.047s

#65 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.047s

#66 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.047s

#67 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.047s

#68 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.048s

#69 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.048s

#70 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.048s

#71 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.048s

#72 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.048s

#73 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.048s

#74 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.049s

#75 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.049s

#76 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.049s

#77 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.049s

#78 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.049s

#79 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.049s

#80 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.05s

#81 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.05s

#82 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.05s

#83 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.05s

#84 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.05s

#85 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.05s

#86 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.001s ... 0.051s

#87 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.051s

#88 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.051s

#89 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.052s

#90 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.052s

#91 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.052s

#92 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.052s

#93 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.052s

#94 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.052s

#95 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.052s

#96 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.052s

#97 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.001s ... 0.052s

#98 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.052s

#99 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.053s

#100 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.053s

#101 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.053s

#102 min, max, avg, median took s +0s ... 0.053s

#103 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.053s

#104 return log +0.004s ... 0.057s

Teilen Sie diesen Artikel um uns zu unterstützen. Jeder Link hilft!
.170
> Notebook Test, Laptop Test und News > Benchmarks / Technik > Benchmarks / Technik > Prozessor Vergleich - Head 2 Head
Autor: Sebastian Jentsch,  8.09.2017 (Update: 19.05.2020)