Core 2 Quad Q9505 vs Phenom II X4 820
Aggregated performance score
Core 2 Quad Q9505 outperforms Phenom II X4 820 by 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
Comparing Phenom II X4 820 and Core 2 Quad Q9505 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2126 | 2110 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation | 2.10 | 2.69 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Architecture codename | Deneb (2009−2011) | no data |
| Release date | September 2009 (14 years ago) | 1 July 2009 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $90 | no data |
| Current price | $58 (0.6x MSRP) | $42 |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Core 2 Quad Q9505 has 28% better value for money than Phenom II X4 820.
Detailed Specifications
Phenom II X4 820 and Core 2 Quad Q9505 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) | no data |
| Threads | 4 | no data |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.83 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 6 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 258 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 71 °C |
| Number of transistors | 758 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | no data | 0.85V-1.3625V |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 820 and Core 2 Quad Q9505 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 | no data |
| Socket | AM3 | FCLGA775,LGA775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 820 and Core 2 Quad Q9505. 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 | - |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Phenom II X4 820 and Core 2 Quad Q9505 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 Phenom II X4 820 and Core 2 Quad Q9505 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 820 and Core 2 Quad Q9505. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | 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.
Core 2 Quad Q9505 outperforms Phenom II X4 820 by 2% based on our aggregated 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 Q9505 outperforms Phenom II X4 820 by 2% 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%
Phenom II X4 820 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9505 by 5% 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%
Phenom II X4 820 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9505 by 24% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & Cons Summary
| Performance score | 1.35 | 1.38 |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Phenom II X4 820 and Core 2 Quad Q9505.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 820 and Core 2 Quad Q9505, 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.
