Celeron Dual-Core T3500 vs Core 2 Quad Q9650

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.60
+95.1%
Celeron Dual-Core T3500
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.82

Core 2 Quad Q9650 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3500 by an impressive 95% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T3500 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking20072491
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.43no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron Dual-Core
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Penryn (2008−2011)
Release dateAugust 2008 (15 years ago)26 September 2010 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$80
Current price$75 $27 (0.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T3500 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3 GHz2.1 GHz
Bus supportno data800 MHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache6 MB (per die)1 MB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography45 nm45 nm
Die size2x 107 mm2107 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Number of transistors820 million410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T3500 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 configuration1no data
SocketLGA775Socket P PGA478
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T3500. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

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

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T3500 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T3500 are enumerated here.

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 Celeron Dual-Core T3500. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3no 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 Q9650 1.60
+95.1%
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 0.82

Core 2 Quad Q9650 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3500 by 95% 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 Q9650 2472
+93.9%
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 1275

Core 2 Quad Q9650 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3500 by 94% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.60 0.82
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 35 Watt

The Core 2 Quad Q9650 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Quad Q9650 is a desktop processor while Celeron Dual-Core T3500 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T3500, 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
Intel Celeron Dual-Core T3500
Celeron Dual-Core T3500

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 1550 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 98 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T3500 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 Celeron Dual-Core T3500, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.