EPYC 7643 vs Core 2 Quad Q9505

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9505
2009
95 Watt
1.39
EPYC 7643
2021
48 cores / 96 threads, 225 Watt
49.17
+3437%

EPYC 7643 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9505 by a whopping 3437% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7643 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking213631
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.6938.27
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Architecture codenameno dataMilan (2021)
Release date1 July 2009 (14 years ago)15 March 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,995
Current price$42 $1330 (0.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7643 has 1323% better value for money than Core 2 Quad Q9505.

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7643 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 coresno data48 (Octatetraconta-Core)
Threadsno data96
Base clock speed2.83 GHz2.3 GHz
Boost clock speedno data3.6 GHz
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data512 KB (per core)
L3 cache6 MB L2 Cache256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm7 nm+
Die sizeno data8x 81 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data33,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoYes
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7643 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 configurationno data2
SocketFCLGA775,LGA775SP3
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt225 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7643. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVXno 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
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7643 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 7643 are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno 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 7643. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.795 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7643.

PCIe versionno data4.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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 Q9505 1.39
EPYC 7643 49.17
+3437%

EPYC 7643 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9505 by 3437% 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%

Core 2 Quad Q9505 2149
EPYC 7643 76050
+3439%

EPYC 7643 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9505 by 3439% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.39 49.17
Recency 1 July 2009 15 March 2021
Chip lithography 45 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 225 Watt

The EPYC 7643 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 7643 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9505 and EPYC 7643, 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 Q9505
Core 2 Quad Q9505
AMD EPYC 7643
EPYC 7643

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.


4.2 41 vote

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9505 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.2 232 votes

Rate EPYC 7643 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q9505 or EPYC 7643, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.