Athlon II X3 440 vs Core 2 Quad Q9400

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9400
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.35
+25%
Athlon II X3 440
2010
3 cores / 3 threads, 95 Watt
1.08

Core 2 Quad Q9400 outperforms Athlon II X3 440 by a significant 25% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Athlon II X3 440 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22562423
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data6.18
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.341.08
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Rana (2009−2011)
Release dateAugust 2008 (16 years ago)25 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$47

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Athlon II X3 440 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)3 (Tri-Core)
Threads43
Base clock speed2.66 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed2.67 GHz3 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64K (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache6 MB (shared)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm45 nm
Die size2x 81 mm2169 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors456 million300 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Athlon II X3 440 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 configuration11
SocketLGA775AM3
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Athlon II X3 440. 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
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Athlon II X3 440 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 Q9400 and Athlon II X3 440 are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Athlon II X3 440. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Athlon II X3 440.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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 Q9400 1.35
+25%
Athlon II X3 440 1.08

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 Q9400 2138
+24.9%
Athlon II X3 440 1712

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 Q9400 334
+8.4%
Athlon II X3 440 308

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 Q9400 925
+28.3%
Athlon II X3 440 721

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.35 1.08
Physical cores 4 3
Threads 4 3

Core 2 Quad Q9400 has a 25% higher aggregate performance score, and 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads.

The Core 2 Quad Q9400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II X3 440 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Athlon II X3 440, 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 Q9400
Core 2 Quad Q9400
AMD Athlon II X3 440
Athlon II X3 440

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.


4.3 1573 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 141 vote

Rate Athlon II X3 440 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q9400 or Athlon II X3 440, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.