A10-7300 vs Core 2 Extreme X9100

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Extreme X9100
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 44 Watt
1.35
+18.4%

Core 2 Extreme X9100 outperforms A10-7300 by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Extreme X9100 and A10-7300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22642396
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core 2 ExtremeAMD Kaveri
Power efficiency2.805.47
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Kaveri (2014−2015)
Release date15 July 2008 (16 years ago)4 June 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$851no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Extreme X9100 and A10-7300 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed3.06 GHz1.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.06 GHz3.2 GHz
Bus rate1066 MHzno data
L1 cache128 KBno data
L2 cache6 MB4096 KB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography45 nm28 nm
Die size107 mm2245 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors410 Million2410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1.05-1.2625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Extreme X9100 and A10-7300 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 configuration1no data
SocketPGA478FP3
Power consumption (TDP)44 Watt19 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Extreme X9100 and A10-7300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
FRTC-+
TrueAudio-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
Out-of-band client management-+
VirusProtect-+
HSA-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States-no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
AMT+no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Extreme X9100 and A10-7300 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Extreme X9100 and A10-7300 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x+no data
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Extreme X9100 and A10-7300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R6 Graphics
iGPU core countno data6
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Extreme X9100 and A10-7300 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core 2 Extreme X9100 and A10-7300 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Extreme X9100 and A10-7300.

PCIe versionno data3.0

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.

Core 2 Extreme X9100 1.35
+18.4%
A10-7300 1.14

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.

Core 2 Extreme X9100 2063
+18.4%
A10-7300 1742

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Core 2 Extreme X9100 438
+54.8%
A10-7300 283

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Core 2 Extreme X9100 767
+21.6%
A10-7300 631

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.

Core 2 Extreme X9100 3834
+92.4%
A10-7300 1992

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.

Core 2 Extreme X9100 7440
+43.3%
A10-7300 5192

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.

Core 2 Extreme X9100 2810
+11.6%
A10-7300 2518

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.

Core 2 Extreme X9100 46
A10-7300 23.8
+93.3%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.35 1.14
Recency 15 July 2008 4 June 2014
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 45 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 44 Watt 19 Watt

Core 2 Extreme X9100 has a 18.4% higher aggregate performance score.

A10-7300, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 131.6% lower power consumption.

The Core 2 Extreme X9100 is our recommended choice as it beats the A10-7300 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Extreme X9100 and A10-7300, 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.


Intel Core 2 Extreme X9100
Core 2 Extreme X9100
AMD A10-7300
A10-7300

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.


4.4 34 votes

Rate Core 2 Extreme X9100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 76 votes

Rate A10-7300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Extreme X9100 or A10-7300, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.