C-50 vs Core 2 Duo SL9400
Primary Details
Comparing Core 2 Duo SL9400 and C-50 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Core 2 Duo | AMD C-Series |
| Architecture codename | Penryn (2008−2011) | Ontario (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 20 August 2008 (15 years ago) | 4 January 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $284 | no data |
| Current price | $124 (0.4x MSRP) | $83 |
Detailed Specifications
Core 2 Duo SL9400 and C-50 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 | 1.86 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1.86 GHz | 1 GHz |
| Bus support | 1066 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 6 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 6 MB L2 Cache | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 40 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | 75 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 410 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | 1.05V - 1.15V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Duo SL9400 and C-50 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 configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | BGA956 | FT1 BGA 413-Ball |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 9 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo SL9400 and C-50. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V |
| 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 |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Core 2 Duo SL9400 and C-50 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 Core 2 Duo SL9400 and C-50 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo SL9400 and C-50. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 Single-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon HD 6250 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Core 2 Duo SL9400 outperforms C-50 by 186% in Passmark.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
Core 2 Duo SL9400 outperforms C-50 by 224% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Core 2 Duo SL9400 outperforms C-50 by 200% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Core 2 Duo SL9400 outperforms C-50 by 105% in 3DMark06 CPU.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Benchmark coverage: 18%
C-50 outperforms Core 2 Duo SL9400 by 158% in wPrime 32.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
Core 2 Duo SL9400 outperforms C-50 by 192% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Pros & Cons Summary
| Recency | 20 August 2008 | 4 January 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 9 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Core 2 Duo SL9400 and C-50. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo SL9400 and C-50, 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.
