Core 2 Quad Q9550 vs A6-9400
Aggregate performance score
A6-9400 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9550 by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A6-9400 and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2040 | 2158 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | Core 2 Quad (Desktop) |
| Power efficiency | 2.49 | 1.46 |
| Architecture codename | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Yorkfield (2007−2009) |
| Release date | 16 March 2019 (5 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A6-9400 and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 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 | 3.4 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 2.83 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 1333 MHz |
| L1 cache | 160K | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (shared) | 12288 KB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 250 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on A6-9400 and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 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 | no data |
| Socket | AM4 | LGA775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-9400 and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-9400 and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-9400 and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2400 | DDR1,DDR2,DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Radeon R5 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-9400 and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.71 | 1.47 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
A6-9400 has a 16.3% higher aggregate performance score, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.
Core 2 Quad Q9550, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
The A6-9400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q9550 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-9400 and Core 2 Quad Q9550, 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.
