Core 2 Quad Q9650 vs Athlon X4 760K

Aggregate performance score

Athlon X4 760K
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 100 Watt
1.88
+19.7%
Core 2 Quad Q9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.57

Athlon X4 760K outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9650 by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon X4 760K and Core 2 Quad Q9650 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19772106
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.771.56
Architecture codenameRichland (2013−2014)Yorkfield (2007−2009)
Release date1 June 2013 (11 years ago)August 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon X4 760K and Core 2 Quad Q9650 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed3.8 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed4.1 GHz3 GHz
Bus rateno data1333 MHz
L1 cache192K64 KB (per core)
L2 cache4 MB6 MB (per die)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size246 mm22x 107 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data71 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,303 million820 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-
Unlocked multiplier+-
VID voltage rangeno data0.85V-1.3625V

Compatibility

Information on Athlon X4 760K and Core 2 Quad Q9650 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
SocketFM2LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X4 760K and Core 2 Quad Q9650. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
PowerNow+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Athlon X4 760K and Core 2 Quad Q9650 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X4 760K and Core 2 Quad Q9650 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X4 760K and Core 2 Quad Q9650. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1866DDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon X4 760K and Core 2 Quad Q9650.

PCIe version2.0no 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.

Athlon X4 760K 1.88
+19.7%
Core 2 Quad Q9650 1.57

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.

Athlon X4 760K 2971
+19.9%
Core 2 Quad Q9650 2477

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Athlon X4 760K 438
+16.2%
Core 2 Quad Q9650 377

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Athlon X4 760K 1039
Core 2 Quad Q9650 1061
+2.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.88 1.57
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 95 Watt

Athlon X4 760K has a 19.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

Core 2 Quad Q9650, on the other hand, has 5.3% lower power consumption.

The Athlon X4 760K is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q9650 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon X4 760K and Core 2 Quad Q9650, 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 Athlon X4 760K
Athlon X4 760K
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650
Core 2 Quad Q9650

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.


4 249 votes

Rate Athlon X4 760K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 1605 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon X4 760K or Core 2 Quad Q9650, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.