Celeron Dual-Core T1700 vs Core 2 Quad Q9650

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.62
+135%
Celeron Dual-Core T1700
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.69

Core 2 Quad Q9650 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T1700 by a whopping 135% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21012726
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron Dual-Core
Power efficiency1.551.80
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Merom (2006−2008)
Release dateAugust 2008 (16 years ago)7 December 2008 (15 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700 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 speed3 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3 GHz1.83 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHz667 MHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache6 MB (per die)1 MB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography45 nm65 nm
Die size2x 107 mm2143 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °C100 °C
Number of transistors820 million291 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700 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
SocketLGA775PPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700. 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 Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700 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 Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700 are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700. 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.


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 Q9650 1.62
+135%
Celeron Dual-Core T1700 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 Q9650 2473
+134%
Celeron Dual-Core T1700 1058

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.62 0.69
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 35 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q9650 has a 134.8% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron Dual-Core T1700, on the other hand, has 171.4% lower power consumption.

The Core 2 Quad Q9650 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Quad Q9650 is a desktop processor while Celeron Dual-Core T1700 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9650 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700, 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 Q9650
Core 2 Quad Q9650
Intel Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Celeron Dual-Core T1700

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.


4.5 1594 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 4 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T1700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q9650 or Celeron Dual-Core T1700, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.