Celeron N5095 vs Core 2 Quad Q9100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9100
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 45 Watt
1.24
Celeron N5095
2021
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
2.65
+114%

Celeron N5095 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9100 by a whopping 114% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking22971702
Place by popularitynot in top-10040
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesCore 2 QuadIntel Jasper Lake
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Jasper Lake (2021)
Release dateAugust 2008 (16 years ago)11 January 2021 (3 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095 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 speed2.26 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.26 GHz2.9 GHz
Bus rate1066 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KBno data
L2 cache6 MB (per die)1.5 MB
L3 cache0 KB4 MB
Chip lithography45 nm10 nm
Die size2x 107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1.05V-1.175Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095 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 configuration21
SocketPGA478FCBGA1338
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.2
AES-NI-+
vProno data-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Smart Responseno data-
Demand Based Switching-no data
GPIOno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
AMT+no data
FSB parity-no data
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB+no data
Identity Protection-+
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel UHD Graphics
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data750 MHz
Execution Unitsno data16

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095.

PCI Express lanesno data8
USB revisionno data2.0/3.2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data14
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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.


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 Q9100 1.24
Celeron N5095 2.65
+114%

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 Q9100 1915
Celeron N5095 4086
+113%

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 Q9100 2905
Celeron N5095 3545
+22%

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 Q9100 10081
Celeron N5095 12283
+21.8%

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 Q9100 3310
Celeron N5095 5272
+59.3%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.24 2.65
Chip lithography 45 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 15 Watt

Celeron N5095 has a 113.7% higher aggregate performance score, a 350% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The Celeron N5095 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q9100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Core 2 Quad Q9100 is a notebook processor while Celeron N5095 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9100 and Celeron N5095, 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 Q9100
Core 2 Quad Q9100
Intel Celeron N5095
Celeron N5095

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 47 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1395 votes

Rate Celeron N5095 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q9100 or Celeron N5095, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.