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 Q9650

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Quad Q9650

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 12 MB vs 1 MB 12x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Significantly higher clock speed 3 GHz vs 2.5 GHz 20% higher clock speed
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.15 GHz vs 2.65 GHz More than 55% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 6x more l2 cache per core
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 71.4 °C vs 65 °C Around 10% higher Maximum operating temperature
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.25 GHz vs 2.62 GHz More than 60% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Core i3 2100T

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 2100T

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 77.19W 2.7x lower typical power consumption
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 83.22 $/year 2.7x lower annual commercial energy cost
Much lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 22.89 $/year 2.7x lower annual home energy cost
Newer Jan, 2011 vs Aug, 2008 Release date over 2 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Quad Q9650 vs Core i3 2100T

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core2 Quad Q9650
128,200 MB/s
Core i3 2100T
125,100 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core2 Quad Q9650  vs
Core i3 2100T 
Clock speed 3 GHz 2.5 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core
Socket type
LGA 775
LGA 1155
Is unlocked Yes No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 95W 35W
Annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year 8.43 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year 30.66 $/year
Performance per watt 1.47 pt/W 4 pt/W
Typical power consumption 77.19W 28.44W

details

Core2 Quad Q9650  vs
Core i3 2100T 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 12 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 3 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 9 25
Operating temperature Unknown - 71.4°C Unknown - 65°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.15 GHz 2.65 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.25 GHz 2.62 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.15 GHz 2.65 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 2000
Number of displays supported N/A 2
GPU clock speed N/A 650 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,100 MHz

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1
Intel Core2 Quad Q9650
Report a correction
Intel Core i3 2100T
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus