Core 2 Duo T9400 vs Athlon 64 FX-62
Aggregate performance score
Core 2 Duo T9400 outperforms Athlon 64 FX-62 by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Core 2 Duo T9400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2771 | 2760 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Athlon 64 (Desktop) | Intel Core 2 Duo |
| Power efficiency | 0.48 | 1.73 |
| Architecture codename | Windsor (2006−2007) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | 15 July 2008 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $316 |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Core 2 Duo T9400 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 | 2.53 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2.53 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1000 MHz | 1066 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 6 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 6 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 107 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 410 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.05V-1.162V |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Core 2 Duo T9400 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.
| Socket | no data | BGA479,BGA956,PBGA479,PGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Core 2 Duo T9400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| 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
Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Core 2 Duo T9400 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 Athlon 64 (Desktop) FX-62 and Core 2 Duo T9400 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.
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.
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.
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
| Performance score | 0.63 | 0.64 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 35 Watt |
Core 2 Duo T9400 has a 1.6% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 257.1% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Athlon 64 FX-62 and Core 2 Duo T9400.
Note that Athlon 64 FX-62 is a desktop processor while Core 2 Duo T9400 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 FX-62 and Core 2 Duo T9400, 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.
