Duo T2400 vs A8-9600

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-9600
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.09
+809%
Core Duo T2400
2006
2 cores / 2 threads, 31 Watt
0.23

A8-9600 outperforms Core Duo T2400 by a whopping 809% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-9600 and Core Duo T2400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18933190
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation14.13no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataCore Duo
Power efficiency3.040.70
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Yonah (2005−2006)
Release date27 July 2017 (7 years ago)January 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$78$16

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A8-9600 and Core Duo T2400 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.1 GHz1.83 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz1.83 GHz
Bus rateno data667 MHz
L1 cacheno data0 KB
L2 cache2048 KB2 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm65 nm
Die size250 mm290 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors3,100 million151 million
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.1625V - 1.3V

Compatibility

Information on A8-9600 and Core Duo T2400 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 configuration11
SocketAM4PPGA478, PBGA479
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt31 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-9600 and Core Duo T2400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

A8-9600 and Core Duo T2400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-9600 and Core Duo T2400 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-9600 and Core Duo T2400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2400DDR1
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R7 Graphicsno data
iGPU core count6no data
Enduro+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-9600 and Core Duo T2400 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-9600 and Core Duo T2400 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-9600 and Core Duo T2400.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes8no 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.

A8-9600 2.09
+809%
Duo T2400 0.23

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

A8-9600 3314
+815%
Duo T2400 362

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.09 0.23
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 31 Watt

A8-9600 has a 808.7% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

Duo T2400, on the other hand, has 109.7% lower power consumption.

The A8-9600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core Duo T2400 in performance tests.

Note that A8-9600 is a desktop processor while Core Duo T2400 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-9600 and Core Duo T2400, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A8-9600
A8-9600
Intel Core Duo T2400
Core Duo T2400

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 1000 votes

Rate A8-9600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 25 votes

Rate Core Duo T2400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-9600 or Core Duo T2400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.