Athlon II X4 641 vs Core 2 Quad Q9650

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.56
+6.8%
Athlon II X4 641
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 100 Watt
1.46

Core 2 Quad Q9650 outperforms Athlon II X4 641 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon II X4 641 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21062165
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.551.38
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Llano (2011−2012)
Release dateAugust 2008 (16 years ago)6 February 2012 (12 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon II X4 641 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 speed3 GHz2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz2.8 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache6 MB (per die)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size2x 107 mm2228 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Number of transistors820 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon II X4 641 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 configuration11
SocketLGA775FM1
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt100 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon II X4 641. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon II X4 641 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 Q9650 and Athlon II X4 641 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon II X4 641. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR3

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 Q9650 1.56
+6.8%
Athlon II X4 641 1.46

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 Q9650 2478
+7.1%
Athlon II X4 641 2313

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 Q9650 377
+0.8%
Athlon II X4 641 374

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 Q9650 1061
Athlon II X4 641 1256
+18.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.56 1.46
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 100 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q9650 has a 6.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 5.3% lower power consumption.

Athlon II X4 641, on the other hand, has a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon II X4 641.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon II X4 641, 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 Q9650
Core 2 Quad Q9650
AMD Athlon II X4 641
Athlon II X4 641

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.


4.5 1607 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 145 votes

Rate Athlon II X4 641 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q9650 or Athlon II X4 641, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.