Phenom X4 9650 vs Core 2 Quad Q8200

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q8200
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.14
+3.6%
Phenom X4 9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.10

Core 2 Quad Q8200 outperforms Phenom X4 9650 by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q8200 and Phenom X4 9650 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23902402
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.111.08
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Agena (2007−2008)
Release dateAugust 2008 (16 years ago)March 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q8200 and Phenom X4 9650 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.33 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.33 GHz2.3 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64K (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache4 MB (shared)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm65 nm
Die size2x 81 mm2285 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors456 million450 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q8200 and Phenom X4 9650 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
SocketLGA775AM2+
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q8200 and Phenom X4 9650. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q8200 and Phenom X4 9650 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 Quad Q8200 and Phenom X4 9650 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q8200 and Phenom X4 9650. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3no 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.

Core 2 Quad Q8200 1.14
+3.6%
Phenom X4 9650 1.10

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 Quad Q8200 1780
+3.4%
Phenom X4 9650 1721

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 Quad Q8200 293
+23.1%
Phenom X4 9650 238

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 Quad Q8200 824
+8.7%
Phenom X4 9650 758

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.14 1.10
Chip lithography 45 nm 65 nm

Core 2 Quad Q8200 has a 3.6% higher aggregate performance score, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core 2 Quad Q8200 and Phenom X4 9650.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q8200 and Phenom X4 9650, 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 Quad Q8200
Core 2 Quad Q8200
AMD Phenom X4 9650
Phenom X4 9650

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.


3.8 541 vote

Rate Core 2 Quad Q8200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 224 votes

Rate Phenom X4 9650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q8200 or Phenom X4 9650, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.