Athlon 64 X2 6000+ vs Core 2 Quad Q9550

Place in the ranking	2158	2802
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Market segment	Desktop processor	Desktop processor
Series	Core 2 Quad (Desktop)	no data
Power efficiency	1.46	0.45
Architecture codename	Yorkfield (2007−2009)	Windsor (2006−2007)
Release date	no data (2024 years ago)	August 2007 (17 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 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 cores	4 (Quad-Core)	2 (Dual-core)
Threads	4	2
Boost clock speed	2.83 GHz	3.1 GHz
Bus rate	1333 MHz	no data
L1 cache	no data	256 KB
L2 cache	12288 KB	512K
L3 cache	no data	0 KB
Chip lithography	45 nm	90 nm
Die size	no data	220 mm²
Number of transistors	no data	227 million
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	-

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 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 configuration	no data	1
Socket	LGA775	AM2
Power consumption (TDP)	95 Watt	125 Watt

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q9550 and Athlon 64 X2 6000+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory types

DDR1,DDR2,DDR3

no 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 Q9550 1.47
+149%

Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 0.59

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 2339
+152%

Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 930

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
+53.5%

Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 241

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
+148%

Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 419

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.47	0.59
Physical cores	4	2
Threads	4	2
Chip lithography	45 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	95 Watt	125 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q9550 has a 149.2% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 31.6% lower power consumption.

The Core 2 Quad Q9550 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 X2 6000+ in performance tests.

Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9550 and Athlon 64 X2 6000+, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.