Celeron N3050 vs Core 2 Quad Q9650
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron N3050 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2011 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.43 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Yorkfield (2007−2009) | Braswell (2015−2016) |
| Release date | August 2008 (15 years ago) | 1 April 2015 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
| Current price | $77 | $247 (2.3x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron N3050 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 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.16 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 6 MB (per die) | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 2x 107 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 71 °C | 90 °C |
| Number of transistors | 820 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron N3050 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 | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | 775 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron N3050. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron N3050. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics (Braswell) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron N3050.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 4 |
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Core 2 Quad Q9650 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 321% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core 2 Quad Q9650 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 150% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core 2 Quad Q9650 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 306% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 6 Watt |
Core 2 Quad Q9650 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Celeron N3050, on the other hand, has a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 1483.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron N3050. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Core 2 Quad Q9650 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3050 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron N3050, 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.
