Phenom II X4 N930 vs Core 2 Quad Q9000

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9000
2009
4 cores / 4 threads
1.01
+2%
Phenom II X4 N930
2010
4 cores / 4 threads
0.99

Core 2 Quad Q9000 outperforms Phenom II X4 N930 by 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary Details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Phenom II X4 N930 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking23192330
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core 2 Quad4x AMD Phenom II
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Champlain (2010−2011)
Release date1 January 2009 (15 years ago)12 May 2010 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$348no data
Current price$133 (0.4x MSRP)$99

Detailed Specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Phenom II X4 N930 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 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2 GHz2 GHz
Bus support1066 MHz3600 MHz
L1 cacheno data512 KB
L2 cache6 MB2 MB
L3 cache6 MB L2 Cacheno data
Chip lithography45 nm45 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors410 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo
VID voltage range1.05V-1.175Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Phenom II X4 N930 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.

SocketPGA478S1
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Phenom II X4 N930. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, 3dNow!, SSE (2,3,4A), AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Vurtualization, HyperTransport 3.0, DDR3-1333 memory controller
VirusProtectno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Phenom II X4 N930 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 Q9000 and Phenom II X4 N930 are enumerated here.

VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Phenom II X4 N930. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3

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 Q9000 1.01
+2%
Phenom II X4 N930 0.99

Core 2 Quad Q9000 outperforms Phenom II X4 N930 by 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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 Quad Q9000 1579
+1.3%
Phenom II X4 N930 1558

Core 2 Quad Q9000 outperforms Phenom II X4 N930 by 1% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Core 2 Quad Q9000 264
+0.8%
Phenom II X4 N930 262

Core 2 Quad Q9000 outperforms Phenom II X4 N930 by 1% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Core 2 Quad Q9000 682
Phenom II X4 N930 932
+36.7%

Phenom II X4 N930 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9000 by 37% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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 Quad Q9000 2396
+37.9%
Phenom II X4 N930 1738

Core 2 Quad Q9000 outperforms Phenom II X4 N930 by 38% 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 Quad Q9000 8008
+26.7%
Phenom II X4 N930 6319

Core 2 Quad Q9000 outperforms Phenom II X4 N930 by 27% 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 Quad Q9000 2863
+1.1%
Phenom II X4 N930 2831

Core 2 Quad Q9000 outperforms Phenom II X4 N930 by 1% 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%

Core 2 Quad Q9000 20.25
Phenom II X4 N930 19.1
+6%

Core 2 Quad Q9000 outperforms Phenom II X4 N930 by 6% 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 Quad Q9000 2
+3.9%
Phenom II X4 N930 2

Core 2 Quad Q9000 outperforms Phenom II X4 N930 by 4% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Gaming performance

Pros & Cons Summary


Performance score 1.01 0.99
Recency 1 January 2009 12 May 2010
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 35 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Phenom II X4 N930.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Phenom II X4 N930, 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
AMD Phenom II X4 N930
Phenom II X4 N930

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.


4.9 531 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 97 votes

Rate Phenom II X4 N930 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & Сomments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q9000 or Phenom II X4 N930, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.