Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core2 Quad Q9400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Quad Q9400

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 6 MB vs 0.26 MB Around 23.5x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much higher clock speed 2.66 GHz vs 0.6 GHz Around 4.5x higher clock speed
Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs ARM A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor
Much more l2 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 0.26 MB/core More than 5.8x more l2 cache per core
More cores 4 vs 1 3 more cores; run more applications at once
More threads 4 vs 1 3 more threads
Front view of Apple APL 0298

Reasons to consider the
Apple APL 0298

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Newer Jun, 2009 vs Jul, 2008 Release date 11 months later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Quad Q9400 vs APL 0298

GeekBench

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core2 Quad Q9400  vs
APL 0298 
Clock speed 2.66 GHz 0.6 GHz
Cores Quad core Single core

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A PowerVR SGX535
GPU clock speed N/A 150 MHz

details

Core2 Quad Q9400  vs
APL 0298 
Architecture x86-64 ARM
Threads 4 1
L2 cache 6 MB 0.26 MB
L2 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 0.26 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 65 nm

power consumption

Typical power consumption 77.19W N/A
Intel Core2 Quad Q9400
Report a correction
Apple APL 0298
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus