A6-3650 vs Core 2 Quad Q9300

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9300
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.25
A6-3650
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 100 Watt
1.31
+4.8%

A6-3650 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9300 by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9300 and A6-3650 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23122277
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.251.24
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Llano (2011−2012)
Release dateMarch 2008 (16 years ago)30 June 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9300 and A6-3650 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 speed2.5 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz2.6 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64K (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache6 MB (shared)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size2x 81 mm2228 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors456 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9300 and A6-3650 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
SocketLGA775FM1
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt100 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9300 and A6-3650. 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 Q9300 and A6-3650 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 Q9300 and A6-3650 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q9300 and A6-3650. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataRadeon HD 6530D

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 Q9300 1.25
A6-3650 1.31
+4.8%

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 Q9300 1986
A6-3650 2079
+4.7%

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 Q9300 319
+8.1%
A6-3650 295

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 Q9300 892
A6-3650 912
+2.2%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.25 1.31
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 100 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q9300 has 5.3% lower power consumption.

A6-3650, on the other hand, has a 4.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core 2 Quad Q9300 and A6-3650.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9300 and A6-3650, 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 Q9300
Core 2 Quad Q9300
AMD A6-3650
A6-3650

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.


4.4 777 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 75 votes

Rate A6-3650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q9300 or A6-3650, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.