CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of Q9500 vs 1354 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

5.1

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core2 Quad Q9500 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core2 Quad Q9500  based on its performance and single-core performance.

See full details

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 Q9500

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Quad Q9500

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 6 MB vs 2 MB 3x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Higher clock speed 2.83 GHz vs 2.2 GHz Around 30% higher clock speed
Much more l2 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 3x more l2 cache per core
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,199 vs 760 Around 60% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.4 GHz vs 2.82 GHz More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Newer Jan, 2010 vs Apr, 2008 Release date over 1 years later
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.83 GHz vs 2.2 GHz Around 75% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Slightly better PassMark score 3,629 vs 2,608 Around 40% better PassMark score
Front view of AMD Opteron 1354

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 1354

Report a correction
Lower typical power consumption 60.94W vs 77.19W More than 20% lower typical power consumption
Lower annual home energy cost 18.07 $/year vs 22.89 $/year More than 20% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 65.7 $/year vs 83.22 $/year More than 20% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Quad Q9500 vs Opteron 1354

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core2 Quad Q9500  vs
Opteron 1354 
Clock speed 2.83 GHz 2.2 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 775
AM2
AM2+

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 95W 75W
Annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year 18.07 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year 65.7 $/year
Performance per watt 1.6 pt/W 1.28 pt/W
Typical power consumption 77.19W 60.94W

details

Core2 Quad Q9500  vs
Opteron 1354 
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 6 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 65 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.36V 1.2 - UnknownV

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.4 GHz 2.82 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.83 GHz 2.2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.4 GHz 2.82 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A

bus

Clock speed 1,333 MHz 1,800 MHz
Intel Core2 Quad Q9500
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 1354
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus