Core 2 Quad Q9300 vs Turion X2 RM-70
Primary details
Comparing Turion X2 RM-70 and Core 2 Quad Q9300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 2294 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | 2x AMD Turion | no data |
| Power efficiency | no data | 1.25 |
| Architecture codename | Puma (2008−2009) | Yorkfield (2007−2009) |
| Release date | 3 June 2008 (16 years ago) | March 2008 (16 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Turion X2 RM-70 and Core 2 Quad Q9300 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3600 MHz | 1333 MHz |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 6 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 2x 81 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 71 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 456 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 0.85V-1.3625V |
Compatibility
Information on Turion X2 RM-70 and Core 2 Quad Q9300 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 | S1 | LGA775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Turion X2 RM-70 and Core 2 Quad Q9300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualization | no data |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | + |
Security technologies
Turion X2 RM-70 and Core 2 Quad Q9300 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 Turion X2 RM-70 and Core 2 Quad Q9300 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Turion X2 RM-70 and Core 2 Quad Q9300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 95 Watt |
Turion X2 RM-70 has 206.5% lower power consumption.
Core 2 Quad Q9300, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Turion X2 RM-70 and Core 2 Quad Q9300. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Turion X2 RM-70 is a notebook processor while Core 2 Quad Q9300 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Turion X2 RM-70 and Core 2 Quad Q9300, 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.
