A8-7410 vs Core 2 Quad Q9550

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9550
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.46
A8-7410
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.71
+17.1%

A8-7410 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9550 by a moderate 17% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and A8-7410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21732048
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesCore 2 Quad (Desktop)AMD A-Series
Power efficiency1.466.51
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Carrizo-L (2015)
Release dateno data7 May 2015 (9 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and A8-7410 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 speedno data2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.83 GHz2.5 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache12288 KB2048 KB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography45 nm28 nm
Die size2x 107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors820 million930 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and A8-7410 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 configuration1no data
SocketLGA775FP4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt12 - 25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and A8-7410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VT, AMD-V
AES-NI-+
FMA-FMA4
AVX-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and A8-7410 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and A8-7410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1,DDR2,DDR3DDR3L-1866
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R5 Graphics
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and A8-7410 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and A8-7410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and A8-7410.

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 Q9550 1.46
A8-7410 1.71
+17.1%

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 Q9550 2339
A8-7410 2741
+17.2%

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 Q9550 370
+53.5%
A8-7410 241

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 Q9550 1041
+66%
A8-7410 627

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 Q9550 3106
+62%
A8-7410 1917

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 Q9550 10825
+132%
A8-7410 4665

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 Q9550 4230
+44.1%
A8-7410 2936

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Core 2 Quad Q9550 3
+81.3%
A8-7410 2

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.46 1.71
Chip lithography 45 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 12 Watt

A8-7410 has a 17.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 691.7% lower power consumption.

The A8-7410 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q9550 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Quad Q9550 is a desktop processor while A8-7410 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9550 and A8-7410, 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 Q9550
Core 2 Quad Q9550
AMD A8-7410
A8-7410

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.1 1878 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 716 votes

Rate A8-7410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q9550 or A8-7410, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.