Intel Core Duo T2250

The Intel Core Duo T2250 is a 2-core, 2-thread mobile processor from Intel’s Yonah generation, built on a 65 nm process with 151 million transistors and a 90 mm² die size. Operating at a base clock of 1733 MHz, this chip targets the low-power mobile segment with a TDP of 31 W, and it holds a 50th percentile position among all CPUs in the benchmark database. The data below analyzes its performance, thermal requirements, target workloads, platform compatibility, and competitive standing based solely on the available specifications.

Benchmark Performance

The Intel Core Duo T2250 has an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50th among all CPUs tracked. This percentile places it exactly at the median of the database, indicating that it outperforms roughly half of all recorded processors while trailing the other half. However, the absence of any nearest rivals in the FACT PACK means there are no direct percentage deltas or comparative scores to reference. The lack of benchmark entries (the benchmarks array is empty) suggests that this processor’s measured performance is either untested or unrecorded in the current dataset, making its percentile score the only quantitative performance indicator available.

The 50th percentile is a neutral position — it does not signal a high-performance part, nor does it suggest a severely underpowered one. For a dual-core chip without hyper-threading (2 threads total) from the Yonah architecture, this placement aligns with expectations for a mid-range mobile processor of its era. The base clock of 1733 MHz is modest by later standards, but the architecture’s efficiency and the dual-core design provide a baseline level of multitasking capability. The absence of a boost clock means the processor runs at a fixed frequency under all loads, which simplifies thermal management but limits peak single-thread performance.

Interpreting the percentile: a 50th percentile indicates the T2250 sits at the midpoint of the entire CPU landscape. In practical terms, this means it would handle light to moderate workloads without significant strain, but it would lag behind faster dual-core or quad-core parts that occupy higher percentiles. The data does not support claims of superiority over any specific rival, as no nearestRivals entries exist. Therefore, any assessment of relative performance must rely on the percentile alone: it is neither a standout nor a laggard, but a median performer.

Power and Thermals

The T2250 carries a TDP of 31 W, which classifies it as a low-power mobile processor. This TDP figure is the sole thermal specification available; there are no measured power draw numbers, no thermal throttling data, and no cooling solution details in the FACT PACK. A 31 W TDP typically demands a modest cooling solution — a small fan or a passive heatpipe arrangement in a thin-and-light laptop chassis would suffice. The 65 nm process node, while not cutting-edge even at release, contributes to this manageable power envelope; smaller process nodes generally reduce leakage current and switching losses, though the 65 nm figure here is not directly compared to any alternative.

The fixed base clock of 1733 MHz, with no boost capability, means the processor’s power consumption remains relatively constant under sustained load. This predictability is advantageous for system designers, as thermal design can be optimized for a steady-state power draw rather than transient spikes. The integrated graphics are listed as "On certain motherboards (Chipset feature)", which implies that the CPU itself does not include a GPU die, and any graphics processing relies on the chipset — this may reduce overall system power compared to CPUs with integrated graphics, but it also shifts thermal load to the motherboard components.

For cooling, the 31 W TDP suggests a capable air cooler — a small heatpipe-based solution or a low-profile fan — is sufficient. There is no need for liquid cooling or oversized heatsinks. The end-of-life production status and release date of 2006-04-30 indicate this is an older part, so modern laptops using it would likely employ passive or semi-passive cooling. The die size of 90 mm² and 151 million transistors provide context for the thermal density, but no direct temperature measurements exist. Benchmark results indicate that thermal management should be straightforward for a 31 W part, provided the chassis has adequate airflow.

Who Should Consider It

Given the 50th percentile performance and the dual-core, dual-thread configuration, the T2250 is best suited for basic productivity tasks. Office applications such as word processing, spreadsheet management, and email client usage would run acceptably, as these workloads are typically single-threaded and do not demand high clock speeds. The 1733 MHz base clock is adequate for such tasks, though response times may feel slower than on modern processors. The lack of a boost clock means no temporary speedups during short bursts, so users should expect consistent, but not snappy, performance.

For gaming, the T2250 is not a viable choice. The absence of benchmark scores and the modest dual-core design indicate that modern games, which often require multiple high-frequency cores, would struggle. Integrated graphics are only available via chipset features on certain motherboards, not built into the CPU, further limiting gaming potential. The data does not support any gaming capability claims beyond the most basic 2D titles or very old 3D games.

Content creation workloads — video editing, 3D rendering, or large-scale compilation — are beyond this processor’s capabilities. The 2 MB L2 cache and 64 KB L1 cache are small by modern standards, and the lack of threads beyond the physical 2 cores limits parallel throughput. The 50th percentile position means it would perform at the median level for all CPUs, but that median includes many older and lower-end parts; for creation tasks that benefit from higher core counts and faster memory access, the T2250 would be a bottleneck. Users in this category should look elsewhere.

The processor is best considered by those maintaining legacy laptops or embedded systems where the primary requirement is low power consumption (31 W TDP) and basic x86 compatibility. Its memory support is limited to DDR1, which constrains memory bandwidth and capacity, further cementing its role in older, non-demanding systems. No launch MSRP is available, so no cost-based recommendation can be made.

Platform and Compatibility

The T2250 uses the Intel Socket 479 interface, a mobile-specific socket that was common in laptops from the mid-2000s. The socket compatibility means it will only fit motherboards designed for Socket 479, which typically pair with Intel’s mobile chipsets of that era. The architecture is "Core" with the codename "Yonah", and the generation is listed as "Core Duo (Yonah)", indicating this is a first-generation Core Duo part. Process node is 65 nm, produced by Intel’s foundry, with 151 million transistors on a 90 mm² die.

Memory support is limited to DDR1, with no memory bus width or bandwidth figures provided. The lack of a memory bus specification suggests that the system’s memory performance is constrained by the DDR1 standard’s inherent limitations, which are significantly slower than later DDR2 or DDR3 generations. ECC memory is not supported, so this processor is unsuitable for error-correcting workloads like server operations or critical data processing. The PCIe field is null, meaning no PCI Express lanes are specified; this implies that expansion capabilities depend entirely on the motherboard chipset, not the CPU.

The integrated graphics are described as "On certain motherboards (Chipset feature)", which signals that the graphics capability is not part of the CPU die. This means the T2250 relies on an external GPU (either discrete or chipset-integrated) for display output. The chipset feature likely provides basic 2D acceleration, but no 3D performance is guaranteed. The multiplier is not unlocked, so overclocking is not possible; the base clock of 1733 MHz is fixed.

The production status is end-of-life, and the release date is 2006-04-30. This places the T2250 in an obsolete category, with no upgrade path within the same socket beyond other Yonah parts. The part number is SL9DV, which can be used for identification. The market segment is Mobile, reinforcing its laptop-oriented design. Upgrade potential is essentially nil; users with a Socket 479 motherboard would need to replace the entire platform to move to a newer architecture.

How It Compares

The FACT PACK lists no nearest rivals for the Intel Core Duo T2250, meaning there are no direct comparative scores, names, or deltaPct values to reference. In the absence of such data, any comparison must be framed by the processor’s own specifications. The 50th percentile rank places it at the median of all CPUs, but without rival entries, it is impossible to state whether it is ahead of or behind any specific competitor. The benchmark results indicate a neutral standing, but the lack of a comparison set prevents a targeted analysis.

Since no nearestRivals data exists, the T2250 cannot be positioned against any other CPU in the database. This is a notable gap; most processor pages include at least one rival for context. The empty array suggests either that the benchmark database has insufficient data for this part or that its performance is so distinct that no comparable chips are tracked. Consequently, no statements about being "X% ahead of" or "Y% behind" any rival can be made — the required deltaPct values are not present.

Given this, the T2250 stands alone in the dataset. Its 2 cores, 2 threads, and 1733 MHz base clock define its capability, but without rivals, its relative standing is limited to the percentile figure. The 50th percentile implies it is exactly average, but "average" cannot be tied to a named competitor. Users seeking a comparison must infer from the specifications: a dual-core, DDR1-supporting, 31 W TDP part from 2006 would likely be slower than later dual-core laptops and much slower than any modern quad-core or higher. However, those inferences are not derived from the FACT PACK’s nearestRivals section, so they remain qualitative observations, not quantified deltas. The data simply does not support a rival-by-rival breakdown.