Core 2 Duo T5870 vs Core 2 Quad Q9000

VS

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Core 2 Duo T5870 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2462not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core 2 QuadIntel Core 2 Duo
Power efficiency2.08no data
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Merom (2006−2008)
Release date1 January 2009 (15 years ago)1 October 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$348no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Core 2 Duo T5870 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed2 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate1066 MHz800 MHz
L2 cache6 MB2 MB
L3 cache6 MB L2 Cache2 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography45 nm65 nm
Die size107 mm2143 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Number of transistors410 Million291 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1.05V-1.175V1.075V-1.175V

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Core 2 Duo T5870 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.

SocketPGA478no data
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Core 2 Duo T5870. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Demand Based Switching--
FSB parity--

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Core 2 Duo T5870 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Core 2 Duo T5870 are enumerated here.

VT-x+-

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.

Core 2 Quad Q9000 1575
+126%
Core 2 Duo T5870 698

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 Q9000 274
+26.3%
Core 2 Duo T5870 217

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 Q9000 677
+89.6%
Core 2 Duo T5870 357

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 Quad Q9000 2396
+14.7%
Core 2 Duo T5870 2089

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 Quad Q9000 8008
+110%
Core 2 Duo T5870 3810

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.

Core 2 Quad Q9000 2863
+75.9%
Core 2 Duo T5870 1628

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 Quad Q9000 20.25
+196%
Core 2 Duo T5870 60.04

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 January 2009 1 October 2008
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 35 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q9000 has an age advantage of 3 months, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.

Core 2 Duo T5870, on the other hand, has 28.6% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Core 2 Duo T5870. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Core 2 Duo T5870, 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 Q9000
Core 2 Quad Q9000
Intel Core 2 Duo T5870
Core 2 Duo T5870

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.


4.9 533 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 28 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo T5870 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q9000 or Core 2 Duo T5870, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.