Athlon 64 4000+ vs Core 2 Quad Q9550

VS

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 64 4000+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2147not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesCore 2 Quad (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency1.47no data
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)San Diego (2001−2005)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)January 2001 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$160

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 64 4000+ 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads41
Boost clock speed2.83 GHz2.6 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cache12288 KB512K
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm130 nm
Die sizeno data230 mm2
Number of transistorsno data233 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 64 4000+ 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
SocketLGA775939
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt89 Watt

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 64 4000+. 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.



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 2348
+591%
Athlon 64 4000+ 340

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 4 1
Threads 4 1
Chip lithography 45 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 89 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q9550 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 188.9% more advanced lithography process.

Athlon 64 4000+, on the other hand, has 6.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Core 2 Quad Q9550 and Athlon 64 4000+. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9550 and Athlon 64 4000+, 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 64 4000+
Athlon 64 4000+

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 1859 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 12 votes

Rate Athlon 64 4000 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 64 4000+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.