E2-9010 vs Core 2 Quad Q9400

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9400
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.34
+94.2%
E2-9010
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.69

Core 2 Quad Q9400 outperforms E2-9010 by an impressive 94% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9400 and E2-9010 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22412712
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency1.334.35
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release dateAugust 2008 (16 years ago)1 June 2016 (8 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9400 and E2-9010 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed2.66 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.67 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache6 MB (shared)2048 KB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography45 nm28 nm
Die size2x 81 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors456 million1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9400 and E2-9010 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
SocketLGA775FP4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt10-15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9400 and E2-9010. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataVirtualization,
AES-NI-+
FMA-FMA4
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 Q9400 and E2-9010 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 Q9400 and E2-9010 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 Q9400 and E2-9010. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR4-1866
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R2 Graphics
iGPU core countno data2
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Quad Q9400 and E2-9010 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core 2 Quad Q9400 and E2-9010 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q9400 and E2-9010.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data8

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 Q9400 1.34
+94.2%
E2-9010 0.69

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 Q9400 2133
+95.2%
E2-9010 1093

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.34 0.69
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 10 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q9400 has a 94.2% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

E2-9010, on the other hand, has a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 850% lower power consumption.

The Core 2 Quad Q9400 is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-9010 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Quad Q9400 is a desktop processor while E2-9010 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9400 and E2-9010, 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 Q9400
Core 2 Quad Q9400
AMD E2-9010
E2-9010

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.


4.3 1552 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 29 votes

Rate E2-9010 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q9400 or E2-9010, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.