EPYC 7473X vs Core 2 Quad Q9505
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7473X outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9505 by a whopping 2658% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7473X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2136 | 71 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.69 | 5.05 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Architecture codename | no data | Milan-X (2022) |
| Release date | 1 July 2009 (15 years ago) | 22 March 2022 (2 years ago) |
| Current price | $42 | $5548 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 7473X has 88% better value for money than Core 2 Quad Q9505.
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7473X 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 | no data | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | no data | 48 |
| Base clock speed | 2.83 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 3.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 6 MB L2 Cache | 768 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | no data | 8x 81 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 71 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 33,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.3625V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7473X 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 configuration | no data | 2 |
| Socket | FCLGA775,LGA775 | SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 240 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7473X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7473X 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 Q9505 and EPYC 7473X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7473X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-3200 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7473X.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
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.
EPYC 7473X outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9505 by 2658% based on our aggregate 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%
EPYC 7473X outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9505 by 2658% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.39 | 38.33 |
| Recency | 1 July 2009 | 22 March 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 240 Watt |
The EPYC 7473X is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q9505 in performance tests.
Note that Core 2 Quad Q9505 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7473X is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7473X, 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.
