Turion 64 MK-36 vs Core 2 Quad Q9000
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Turion 64 MK-36 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2432 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Core 2 Quad | Turion 64 |
| Architecture codename | Penryn (2008−2011) | Richmond |
| Release date | 1 January 2009 (15 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $348 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Turion 64 MK-36 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1066 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L2 cache | 6 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | 6 MB L2 Cache | no data |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 410 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 1.05V-1.175V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Turion 64 MK-36 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.
| Socket | PGA478 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 31 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Turion 64 MK-36. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Turion 64 MK-36 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 Turion 64 MK-36 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | + | no data |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 31 Watt |
Core 2 Quad Q9000 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Turion 64 MK-36, on the other hand, has 45.2% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Turion 64 MK-36. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9000 and Turion 64 MK-36, 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.
