Phenom X3 8650 vs Core 2 Quad Q9550

Place in the ranking	2158	2637
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Market segment	Desktop processor	Desktop processor
Series	Core 2 Quad (Desktop)	no data
Power efficiency	1.46	0.77
Architecture codename	Yorkfield (2007−2009)	Toliman (2008)
Release date	no data (2024 years ago)	April 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Phenom X3 8650 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)	3 (Tri-Core)
Threads	4	3
Boost clock speed	2.83 GHz	2.3 GHz
Bus rate	1333 MHz	no data
L1 cache	no data	128 KB (per core)
L2 cache	12288 KB	512 KB (per core)
L3 cache	no data	2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography	45 nm	65 nm
Die size	no data	285 mm²
Number of transistors	no data	450 million
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	-

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Phenom X3 8650 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	1
Socket	LGA775	AM2+
Power consumption (TDP)	95 Watt	95 Watt

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Phenom X3 8650 are enumerated here.

AMD-V

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Phenom X3 8650. 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.

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 1.47
+90.9%

Phenom X3 8650 0.77

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 2338
+92%

Phenom X3 8650 1218

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
+46.8%

Phenom X3 8650 252

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 1038
+67.7%

Phenom X3 8650 619

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.47	0.77
Physical cores	4	3
Threads	4	3
Chip lithography	45 nm	65 nm

Core 2 Quad Q9550 has a 90.9% higher aggregate performance score, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Core 2 Quad Q9550 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom X3 8650 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9550 and Phenom X3 8650, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.