A12-9720P vs Core 2 Extreme QX9300

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Extreme QX9300
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 45 Watt
1.02

A12-9720P outperforms Core 2 Extreme QX9300 by a considerable 46% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26702350
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesCore 2 ExtremeAMD Bristol Ridge
DesignerIntelAMD
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release dateAugust 2008 (17 years ago)1 June 2016 (9 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and A12-9720P 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 speed2.53 GHz2.7 GHz
Boost clock speed2.53 GHz3.6 GHz
Bus rate1066 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KBno data
L2 cache12 MB2 MB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography45 nm28 nm
Die size2x 107 mm2250 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Number of transistorsno data3100 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
VID voltage range1.05V-1.175Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and A12-9720P 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 configuration2no data
SocketPGA478FP4
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt2 MB

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and A12-9720P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, TBM, FMA4, XOP, SMEP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
AMT+no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and A12-9720P 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 Extreme QX9300 and A12-9720P are enumerated here.

VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and A12-9720P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) ( - 758 MHz)

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 1.02
A12-9720P 1.49
+46.1%

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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 1805
A12-9720P 2622
+45.3%
Samples: 584

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.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 3114
+13.5%
A12-9720P 2743

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.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 10882
+47.8%
A12-9720P 7361

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.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 15.74
A12-9720P 13.01
+21%

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.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 3
A12-9720P 3
+1.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.02 1.49
Chip lithography 45 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 2 Watt

A12-9720P has a 46.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 2150% lower power consumption.

The AMD A12-9720P is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9300 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

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


Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9300
Core 2 Extreme QX9300
AMD A12-9720P
A12-9720P

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

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


4.1 108 votes

Rate Core 2 Extreme QX9300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 467 votes

Rate A12-9720P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and A12-9720P, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.