Ryzen Embedded R1600 vs Core 2 Quad Q9400

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9400
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.34
Ryzen Embedded R1600
2020
2 cores / 4 threads, 25 Watt
2.06
+53.7%

Ryzen Embedded R1600 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9400 by an impressive 54% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Ryzen Embedded R1600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22431889
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Power efficiency1.337.80
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Zen (2017−2020)
Release dateAugust 2008 (16 years ago)25 February 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Ryzen Embedded R1600 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)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.66 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.67 GHz3.1 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64K (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache6 MB (shared)512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm14 nm
Die size2x 81 mm2209.8 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors456 million4,950 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Ryzen Embedded R1600 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
SocketLGA775FP5
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Ryzen Embedded R1600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
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 Ryzen Embedded R1600 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 Ryzen Embedded R1600 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
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 Ryzen Embedded R1600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR4-2400

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Ryzen Embedded R1600.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data8

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 1.34
Ryzen Embedded R1600 2.06
+53.7%

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 2134
Ryzen Embedded R1600 3276
+53.5%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.34 2.06
Physical cores 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 25 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q9400 has 100% more physical cores.

Ryzen Embedded R1600, on the other hand, has a 53.7% higher aggregate performance score, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 280% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen Embedded R1600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q9400 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Quad Q9400 is a desktop processor while Ryzen Embedded R1600 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Ryzen Embedded R1600, 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 Ryzen Embedded R1600
Ryzen Embedded R1600

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 1557 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 33 votes

Rate Ryzen Embedded R1600 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 Ryzen Embedded R1600, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.