Ultra 9 288V vs C-50

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing C-50 and Core Ultra 9 288V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated618
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD C-Seriesno data
Power efficiencyno data38.82
Architecture codenameOntario (2011−2012)Lunar Lake (2024)
Release date4 January 2011 (13 years ago)24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

C-50 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 cores2 (Dual-core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads28
Base clock speedno data3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed1 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus rateno data37 MHz
L1 cache64K (per core)192 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)2.5 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography40 nm3 nm
Die size75 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on C-50 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 configuration11
SocketFT1 BGA 413-BallIntel BGA 2833
Power consumption (TDP)9 Watt30 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by C-50 and Core Ultra 9 288V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-Vno data
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+

Security technologies

C-50 and Core Ultra 9 288V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by C-50 and Core Ultra 9 288V are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by C-50 and Core Ultra 9 288V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3 Single-channelDDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6250Arc 140V

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by C-50 and Core Ultra 9 288V.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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.

C-50 265
Ultra 9 288V 19542
+7274%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

C-50 661
Ultra 9 288V 10697
+1518%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

C-50 1282
Ultra 9 288V 45377
+3441%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

C-50 636
Ultra 9 288V 12505
+1868%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

C-50 111.2
Ultra 9 288V 9
+1136%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

C-50 0
Ultra 9 288V 20
+5108%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 4 January 2011 24 September 2024
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 8
Chip lithography 40 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 9 Watt 30 Watt

C-50 has 233.3% lower power consumption.

Ultra 9 288V, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 13 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 1233.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between C-50 and Core Ultra 9 288V. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between C-50 and Core Ultra 9 288V, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD C-50
C-50
Intel Core Ultra 9 288V
Core Ultra 9 288V

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


1.9 268 votes

Rate C-50 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 10 votes

Rate Core Ultra 9 288V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about C-50 or Core Ultra 9 288V, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.