Athlon 3000G vs Core 2 Quad Q9550

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9550
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.50
Athlon 3000G
2019
2 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
2.88
+92%

Athlon 3000G outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9550 by an impressive 92% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 3000G processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21541669
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data5.27
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesCore 2 Quad (Desktop)AMD Athlon
Power efficiency1.467.64
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Zen+ (2018−2019)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)7 November 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$49

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 3000G 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)
Threads44
Base clock speedno data3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.83 GHz3.5 GHz
Bus typeno dataPCIe 3.0
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
Multiplierno data35
L1 cacheno data192 KB
L2 cache12288 KB1 MB
L3 cacheno data4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm14 nm
Die sizeno data209.78 mm2?
Number of transistorsno data4940 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 3000G 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketLGA775AM4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 3000G. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
PowerNow-+
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 3000G are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 3000G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1,DDR2,DDR3DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB?
Maximum memory bandwidthno data42.671 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 3000G.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data6

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 Q9550 1.50
Athlon 3000G 2.88
+92%

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 Q9550 2340
Athlon 3000G 4482
+91.5%

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 Q9550 370
Athlon 3000G 958
+159%

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 Q9550 1038
Athlon 3000G 1963
+89.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.50 2.88
Physical cores 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 35 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q9550 has 100% more physical cores.

Athlon 3000G, on the other hand, has a 92% higher aggregate performance score, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 171.4% lower power consumption.

The Athlon 3000G is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q9550 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9550 and Athlon 3000G, 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 Q9550
Core 2 Quad Q9550
AMD Athlon 3000G
Athlon 3000G

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.


4.1 1862 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 2077 votes

Rate Athlon 3000G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q9550 or Athlon 3000G, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.