EPYC 75F3 vs Core 2 Quad Q8200

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q8200
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.17
EPYC 75F3
2021
32 cores / 64 threads, 280 Watt
44.76
+3726%

EPYC 75F3 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q8200 by a whopping 3726% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 75F3 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking238450
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data5.93
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiency1.1214.58
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Milan (2021−2023)
Release dateAugust 2008 (16 years ago)12 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,860

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 75F3 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)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads464
Base clock speed2.33 GHz2.95 GHz
Boost clock speed2.33 GHz4 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
Multiplierno data29.5
L1 cache64K (per core)2 MB
L2 cache4 MB (shared)16 MB
L3 cache0 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm7 nm+
Die size2x 81 mm28x 81 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors456 million33,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 75F3 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 configuration12
SocketLGA775SP3
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 75F3. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 75F3 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 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 75F3 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 75F3. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.795 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 75F3.

PCIe versionno data4.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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.

Core 2 Quad Q8200 1.17
EPYC 75F3 44.76
+3726%

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.

Core 2 Quad Q8200 1783
EPYC 75F3 68505
+3742%

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.

Core 2 Quad Q8200 293
EPYC 75F3 1826
+523%

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.

Core 2 Quad Q8200 824
EPYC 75F3 16432
+1894%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.17 44.76
Physical cores 4 32
Threads 4 64
Chip lithography 45 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 280 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q8200 has 194.7% lower power consumption.

EPYC 75F3, on the other hand, has a 3725.6% higher aggregate performance score, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 75F3 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q8200 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Quad Q8200 is a desktop processor while EPYC 75F3 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 75F3, 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.


Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200
Core 2 Quad Q8200
AMD EPYC 75F3
EPYC 75F3

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.


3.8 539 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q8200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate EPYC 75F3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q8200 or EPYC 75F3, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.