Core 2 Quad Q8400 vs Core Ultra 5 125H
Aggregate performance score
Core Ultra 5 125H outperforms Core 2 Quad Q8400 by a whopping 975% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 529 | 2276 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Meteor Lake-H | no data |
| Power efficiency | 47.22 | 1.30 |
| Architecture codename | Meteor Lake-H (2023) | Yorkfield (2007−2009) |
| Release date | 14 December 2023 (less than a year ago) | 19 April 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $375 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400 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 | 14 (Tetradeca-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 18 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 2.66 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.5 GHz | 0.67 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 1333 MHz |
| L1 cache | 112 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB (per core) | 4 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 18 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | Intel 4 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 2x 82 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 110 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 71 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 456 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 0.85V-1.3625V |
Compatibility
Information on Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400 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 |
| Socket | FCBGA2049 | FCLGA775,LGA775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | - |
| TSX | + | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
| Deep Learning Boost | + | - |
| Supported AI Software Frameworks | OpenVINO™, WindowsML, ONNX RT | - |
Security technologies
Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | - |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 96 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel® Arc™ graphics | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 2.2 GHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 4 | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096 x 2304 @ 60Hz (HDMI 2.1 TMDS) 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz (HDMI2.1 FRL) | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 3840x2400 @ 120Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12.2 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 28 | no data |
| PCI support | 5.0 and 4.0 | 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 13.97 | 1.30 |
| Recency | 14 December 2023 | 19 April 2009 |
| Physical cores | 14 | 4 |
| Threads | 18 | 4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 95 Watt |
Ultra 5 125H has a 974.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, 250% more physical cores and 350% more threads, and 239.3% lower power consumption.
The Core Ultra 5 125H is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q8400 in performance tests.
Be aware that Core Ultra 5 125H is a notebook processor while Core 2 Quad Q8400 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q8400, 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.
