EPYC 7451 vs Core 2 Quad Q9550

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9550
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.51
EPYC 7451
2017
24 cores / 48 threads, 180 Watt
16.72
+1007%

EPYC 7451 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9550 by a whopping 1007% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9550 and EPYC 7451 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking2051358
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.802.08
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesCore 2 Quad (Desktop)AMD EPYC
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Naples (2017−2018)
Release dateno data20 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,400
Current price$54 $2768 (1.2x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Core 2 Quad Q9550 has 35% better value for money than EPYC 7451.

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9550 and EPYC 7451 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)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads448
Base clock speedno data2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed2.83 GHz2.3 GHz
Bus support1333 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data2.25 MB
L2 cache12288 KB12 MB
L3 cacheno data64 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm14 nm
Die sizeno data213 mm2
Number of transistorsno data19200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9550 and EPYC 7451 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 (Multiprocessor)
SocketLGA775TR4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9550 and EPYC 7451. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NIno data+
AVXno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad Q9550 and EPYC 7451 are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q9550 and EPYC 7451. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1,DDR2,DDR3DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data2 TiB
Max memory channelsno data8
Maximum memory bandwidthno data170.671 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q9550 and EPYC 7451.

PCIe versionno data3.0
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 Q9550 1.51
EPYC 7451 16.72
+1007%

EPYC 7451 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9550 by 1007% 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 Q9550 2341
EPYC 7451 25863
+1005%

EPYC 7451 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9550 by 1005% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.51 16.72
Physical cores 4 24
Threads 4 48
Chip lithography 45 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 180 Watt

The EPYC 7451 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 EPYC 7451 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9550 and EPYC 7451, 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 EPYC 7451
EPYC 7451

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.


4.1 1832 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 3 votes

Rate EPYC 7451 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 EPYC 7451, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.