0 Comments
| Intel Core2 Quad Q9550 vs Duo E8400 |
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Quad Q9550
- 2.83 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Quad Q9550
![]() | More cores 4 | ![]() | More threads 4 |
VS
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Duo E8400
![]() | Higher clock speed 3 GHz | ![]() | Much lower typical power consumption 52.81W |
![]() | Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.22 GHz | ![]() | Significantly lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| |||||||
Higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 2.83 GHz | More than 5% higher clock speed | |||
Much lower typical power consumption | 52.81W | vs | 77.19W | More than 30% lower typical power consumption | |||
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 GHz | vs | 3.99 GHz | More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Significantly lower annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | vs | 22.89 $/year | More than 30% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | vs | 83.22 $/year | More than 30% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Higher Maximum operating temperature | 72.4 °C | vs | 71.4 °C | Almost the same | |||
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | vs | 4.03 GHz | Around 5% better overclocked clock speed (Water) |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Quad Q9550 vs Duo E8400
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q9550
5,498
Core2 Duo E8400
2,982
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q9550
1,604
Core2 Duo E8400
1,625
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q9550
121,500 MB/s
Core2 Duo E8400
128,000 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q9550
5,132
Core2 Duo E8400
2,826
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q9550
5,686
Core2 Duo E8400
3,092
GeekBench
Core2 Quad Q9550
7,065
Core2 Duo E8400
4,794
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Core2 Quad Q9550
4,002
Core2 Duo E8400
2,160
PassMark (Single Core)
Core2 Quad Q9550
1,199
Core2 Duo E8400
1,251
Reviews Word on the street
Core2 Quad Q9550 | vs | Duo E8400 | ||
![]() | 9.8 | 9.1 |
---|
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Quad Q9550 | vs | Duo E8400 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.83 GHz | 3 GHz | |
Cores | Quad core | Dual core | |
Socket type | |||
LGA 775 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Supports trusted computing | Yes | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE4 | |||
SSE3 | |||
EM64T | |||
SSE | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
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 |
details | Core2 Quad Q9550 | vs | Duo E8400 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 4 | 2 | |
L2 cache | 12 MB | 6 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 3 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 45 nm | 45 nm | |
Transistor count | 820,000,000 | 410,000,000 | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Clock multiplier | 8 | 9 | |
Voltage range | 0.85 - 1.36V | 0.85 - 1.36V | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 71.4°C | Unknown - 72.4°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclock popularity | 127 | 125 | |
Overclock review score | 5 | 4.5 | |
Overclocked clock speed | 3.99 GHz | 4.22 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.03 GHz | 4.23 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.99 GHz | 4.22 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 95W | 65W | |
Annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | 15.66 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | 56.94 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 1.51 pt/W | 1.83 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 77.19W | 52.81W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
Clock speed | 1,333 MHz | 1,333 MHz |
Intel Core2 Quad Q9550 ![]() | Intel Core2 Duo E8400 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
E8400 vs Q6600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $125 | |
E8400 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $125 | |
E8400 vs E7500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $64 | |
E8400 vs E5700 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $179 | |
E8400 vs Q8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$287 | $339 | |
Q9550 vs Q9650 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$287 | ||
Q9550 vs Q6600 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$134 | $225 | |
847 vs 3217U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
3470 vs 5200 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
4005U vs N3540 | ||