EPYC 7532 vs Core 2 Quad Q9650

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.56
EPYC 7532
2020
32 cores / 64 threads, 200 Watt
33.21
+2029%

EPYC 7532 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9650 by a whopping 2029% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q9650 and EPYC 7532 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2108118
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiency1.5515.71
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release dateAugust 2008 (16 years ago)19 February 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q9650 and EPYC 7532 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)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads464
Base clock speed3 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
Multiplierno data24
L1 cache64 KB (per core)2 MB
L2 cache6 MB (per die)16 MB
L3 cache0 KB256 MB
Chip lithography45 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size2x 107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Number of transistors820 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q9650 and EPYC 7532 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
SocketLGA775Socket SP3
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt200 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q9650 and EPYC 7532. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

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

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q9650 and EPYC 7532 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 EPYC 7532 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 Q9650 and EPYC 7532. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Max memory channelsno data8
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

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 1.56
EPYC 7532 33.21
+2029%

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 2478
EPYC 7532 52755
+2029%

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 Q9650 377
EPYC 7532 1208
+220%

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 Q9650 1061
EPYC 7532 10136
+855%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.56 33.21
Physical cores 4 32
Threads 4 64
Chip lithography 45 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 200 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q9650 has 110.5% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7532, on the other hand, has a 2028.8% higher aggregate performance score, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7532 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q9650 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Quad Q9650 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7532 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q9650 and EPYC 7532, 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
AMD EPYC 7532
EPYC 7532

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 1608 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 23 votes

Rate EPYC 7532 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 EPYC 7532, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.