Athlon X4 750 vs Core 2 Quad Q9650

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.56
Athlon X4 750
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
1.65
+5.8%

Athlon X4 750 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9650 by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon X4 750 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21212082
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.552.40
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Richland (2013−2014)
Release dateAugust 2008 (16 years ago)October 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon X4 750 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 GHz3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz4 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)192K
L2 cache6 MB (per die)4 MB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size2x 107 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors820 million1,303 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon X4 750 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
SocketLGA775FM2
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon X4 750. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
PowerNow-+
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 X4 750 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 X4 750 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 X4 750. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR3-1866

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon X4 750.

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 Q9650 1.56
Athlon X4 750 1.65
+5.8%

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 2479
Athlon X4 750 2625
+5.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.56 1.65
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 65 Watt

Athlon X4 750 has a 5.8% higher aggregate performance score, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon X4 750.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Athlon X4 750, 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 X4 750
Athlon X4 750

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.


4.6 1630 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 40 votes

Rate Athlon X4 750 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 X4 750, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.