Pentium Dual Core T3400 vs Core 2 Quad Q9550
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Pentium Dual Core T3400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2123 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Core 2 Quad (Desktop) | Intel Pentium Dual Core |
| Architecture codename | Yorkfield (2007−2009) | Merom (2006−2008) |
| Release date | no data | 1 October 2008 (15 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Pentium Dual Core T3400 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.83 GHz | 2.16 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1333 MHz | 667 MHz |
| L2 cache | 12288 KB | 1 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | no data | 143 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 291 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Pentium Dual Core T3400 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.
| Socket | LGA775 | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 35 Watt |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Pentium Dual Core T3400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1,DDR2,DDR3 | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 35 Watt |
Core 2 Quad Q9550 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.
Pentium Dual T3400, on the other hand, has 171.4% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Core 2 Quad Q9550 and Pentium Dual Core T3400. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Core 2 Quad Q9550 is a desktop processor while Pentium Dual Core T3400 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9550 and Pentium Dual Core T3400, 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.
