Intel Pentium Dual Core T4300 vs Intel Pentium Dual Core T4200

Intel Pentium Dual Core T4300

► remove Intel T4300

The Intel Pentium T4300 (or Intel Pentium Dual-Core T4300) is an entry level dual-core CPU for laptops. Compared to the Core 2 Duo CPUs, the T4300 has only 1 MB Level 2 cache and some power saving technology is deactivated. 

Intel® Pentium® Processors do not support the following features:

  • Intel® Virtualization Technology
  • Intel® Dynamic Acceleration
  • Intel® Dynamic FSB Frequency Switching
  • C3E
  • Deeper Sleep State (C4)
  • Intel® Enhanced Deeper Sleep State

Therefore, the power consumption in idle mode should be a bit above similar clocked Core 2 Duo CPUs. Furtheremore, virtualization technology VT-x is also not available for the T4300.

Due to the slow clock rate and the small level 2 cache, the Pentium T4300 will limit the performance of demanding 3D games (e.g. Sumpreme Commander). For entry level applications like office, SD video cutting, image processing, Internet and casual gaming, the T4300 should be sufficient.

The Pentium T4300 is based on the Intel Penryn core and features 2 integer units, 1 floating point unit, 1 load unit, and 1 store unit in a 14-step pipeline. 

Intel Pentium Dual Core T4200

► remove

The Intel Pentium T4200 (or Intel Pentium Dual-Core T4200) is an entry level dual-core CPU for laptops. Compared to the Core 2 Duo CPUs, the T4200 has only 1 MB Level 2 cache and some power saving technology is deactivated. 

Intel® Pentium® Processors do not support the following features:

  • Intel® Virtualization Technology
  • Intel® Dynamic Acceleration
  • Intel® Dynamic FSB Frequency Switching
  • C3E
  • Deeper Sleep State (C4)
  • Intel® Enhanced Deeper Sleep State

Therefore, the power consumption in idle mode should be a bit above similar clocked Core 2 Duo CPUs. Furtheremore, virtualization technology VT-x is also not available for the T4200.

Due to the slow clock rate and the small level 2 cache, the Pentium T4200 will limit the performance of demanding 3D games (e.g. Sumpreme Commander). For entry level applications like office, SD video cutting, image processing, Internet and casual gaming, the T4200 should be sufficient.

The Pentium T4200 is based on the Intel Penryn core and features 2 integer units, 1 floating point unit, 1 load unit, and 1 store unit in a 14-step pipeline. 

Intel Pentium Dual Core T4300Intel Pentium Dual Core T4200
Intel Pentium Dual CoreIntel Pentium Dual Core
PenrynPenryn
: Pentium Dual Core Penryn
Intel Pentium Dual Core T4500 (compare)2300 MHz2 / 2
Intel Pentium Dual Core T4400 (compare)2200 MHz2 / 2
» Intel Pentium Dual Core T43002100 MHz2 / 2
Intel Pentium Dual Core T42002000 MHz2 / 2
Intel Pentium Dual Core SU4100 (compare)1300 MHz2 / 2
Intel Pentium Dual Core T4500 (compare)2300 MHz2 / 2
Intel Pentium Dual Core T4400 (compare)2200 MHz2 / 2
Intel Pentium Dual Core T43002100 MHz2 / 2
» Intel Pentium Dual Core T42002000 MHz2 / 2
Intel Pentium Dual Core SU4100 (compare)1300 MHz2 / 2
2100 MHz2000 MHz
800800
128 KB128 KB
1 MB1 MB
2 / 22 / 2
35 35
410 410
45 1.05-1.15V45
107 mm2107 mm2
PGA478PG478
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology (EIST), Intel 64, XD bit, iAMT2 (Intel Active Management), TXTMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology (EIST), Intel 64, XD bit, iAMT2 (Intel Active Management), TXT
105 °C

Cinebench R10 - Rendering Single 32Bit
min: 2153     avg: 2243.3     median: 2242 (25%)     max: 2335 Points
min: 1976     avg: 2014.2     median: 2013 (22%)     max: 2040 Points
Cinebench R10 - Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
min: 3963     avg: 4148.3     median: 4057 (8%)     max: 4425 Points
min: 3489     avg: 3750.9     median: 3801 (8%)     max: 3856 Points
Cinebench R10 - Rendering Multiple CPUs 64Bit
4415 Points (6%)
Cinebench R10 - Rendering Single CPUs 64Bit
2040 Points (20%)
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m *
1252 seconds (15%)
min: 1236     avg: 1642.9     median: 1241.8 (15%)     max: 2451 seconds
wPrime 2.0x - 32m *
39 seconds (8%)
min: 39     avg: 51.4     median: 39.3 (8%)     max: 76 seconds
3DMark 06 - CPU
min: 1692     avg: 1797.5     median: 1825 (13%)     max: 1848 Points
min: 1578     avg: 1610.3     median: 1613 (11%)     max: 1637 Points
3DMark 06 - CPU - Standard 1280x768 1280x768
1784 Points (59%)
3DMark 06 - CPU - Standard 1280x720
1735 Points (55%)
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
min: 22     avg: 25.3     median: 26 (6%)     max: 28 Seconds
min: 22     avg: 25     median: 25 (5%)     max: 28 Seconds
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
min: 54     avg: 62.3     median: 64 (3%)     max: 69 Seconds
min: 54     avg: 58.7     median: 54 (2%)     max: 68 Seconds
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M *
min: 1341     avg: 1469.3     median: 1528 (7%)     max: 1539 Seconds
min: 1341     avg: 1605.8     median: 1747 (8%)     max: 1830 Seconds
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
min: 17767     avg: 18550     median: 18550 (9%)     max: 19333 MIPS
min: 18119     avg: 18259     median: 18259 (9%)     max: 18399 MIPS
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
min: 13927     avg: 14231     median: 14231 (11%)     max: 14535 MFLOPS
min: 14415     avg: 14561.5     median: 14561.5 (11%)     max: 14708 MFLOPS
PCMark 05 - Standard 1024x768
min: 3910     avg: 4187.5     median: 4110.5 (26%)     max: 4756 Points
Windows Vista Experience Index - CPU
min: 4.9     avg: 5     median: 5 (71%)     max: 5.1 Points
Windows 7 Experience Index - Processor
min: 5.3     avg: 5.4     median: 5.4 (69%)     max: 5.4 points
3DMark Vantage - P CPU no PhysX 1280x1024
min: 3590     avg: 3787.5     median: 3787.5 (6%)     max: 3985 Points
3434 Points (6%)

Average Benchmarks Intel Pentium Dual Core T4300 → 100%

Average Benchmarks Intel Pentium Dual Core T4200 → 98%

-
-
* 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), 2019, 2018
v1.8.1a
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)