Core 2 Duo T9500 vs Phenom II X4 N970
Aggregated performance score
Core 2 Duo T9500 outperforms Phenom II X4 N970 by 10% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
Comparing Phenom II X4 N970 and Core 2 Duo T9500 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2295 | 2244 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 4x AMD Phenom II | Intel Core 2 Duo |
| Architecture codename | Champlain (2010−2011) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| Release date | 16 December 2010 (13 years ago) | 10 January 2008 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $530 |
| Current price | no data | $103 (0.2x MSRP) |
Detailed Specifications
Phenom II X4 N970 and Core 2 Duo T9500 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 | 2.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| Bus support | 3600 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 512 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 6 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 6 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 107 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 410 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1V-1.25V |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 N970 and Core 2 Duo T9500 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.
| Socket | S1 | BGA479,PBGA479,PGA478,PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 N970 and Core 2 Duo T9500. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Phenom II X4 N970 and Core 2 Duo T9500 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 N970 and Core 2 Duo T9500 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | 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 Duo T9500 outperforms Phenom II X4 N970 by 10% 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 Duo T9500 outperforms Phenom II X4 N970 by 9% 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 Duo T9500 outperforms Phenom II X4 N970 by 29% 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 N970 outperforms Core 2 Duo T9500 by 69% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
Core 2 Duo T9500 outperforms Phenom II X4 N970 by 59% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Phenom II X4 N970 outperforms Core 2 Duo T9500 by 26% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Phenom II X4 N970 outperforms Core 2 Duo T9500 by 29% in 3DMark06 CPU.
Pros & Cons Summary
| Performance score | 1.05 | 1.15 |
| Recency | 16 December 2010 | 10 January 2008 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Phenom II X4 N970 and Core 2 Duo T9500.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 N970 and Core 2 Duo T9500, 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.
