Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 vs Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400
Vergleichende Analyse von Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 und Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 Prozessoren für alle bekannten Merkmale in den folgenden Kategorien: Essenzielles, Leistung, Kompatibilität, Sicherheit & Zuverlässigkeit, Fortschrittliche Technologien, Virtualisierung, Speicher. Benchmark-Prozessorleistungsanalyse: PassMark - Single thread mark, PassMark - CPU mark, Geekbench 4 - Single Core, Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core, 3DMark Fire Strike - Physics Score, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Unterschiede
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550
- Etwa 6% bessere Leistung in PassMark - Single thread mark: 1216 vs 1142
- Etwa 13% bessere Leistung in PassMark - CPU mark: 2338 vs 2068
- Etwa 14% bessere Leistung in Geekbench 4 - Single Core: 412 vs 362
- Etwa 14% bessere Leistung in Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core: 1299 vs 1139
- Etwa 51% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 30.904 vs 20.494
- Etwa 2% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.175 vs 0.171
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 1216 vs 1142 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 2338 vs 2068 |
| Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 412 vs 362 |
| Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 1299 vs 1139 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 0.612 vs 0.609 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 30.904 vs 20.494 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.175 vs 0.171 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400
- Etwa 11% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 1.4 vs 1.258
- Etwa 10% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 4.93 vs 4.476
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 1.4 vs 1.258 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 4.93 vs 4.476 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
CPU 1: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550
CPU 2: Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400
| PassMark - Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench 4 - Single Core |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
| Name | Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 | Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 1216 | 1142 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 2338 | 2068 |
| Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 412 | 362 |
| Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 1299 | 1139 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Physics Score | 0 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 0.612 | 0.609 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 30.904 | 20.494 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.175 | 0.171 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 1.258 | 1.4 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 4.476 | 4.93 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 | Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 | |
|---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
| Architektur Codename | Yorkfield | Yorkfield |
| Startdatum | Q1'08 | April 2009 |
| Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 3016 | 3008 |
| Processor Number | Q9550 | Q8400 |
| Serie | Legacy Intel® Core™ Processors | Legacy Intel® Core™ Processors |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Vertikales Segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Jetzt kaufen | $99.50 | |
| Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 9.38 | |
Leistung |
||
| 64-Bit-Unterstützung | ||
| Base frequency | 2.83 GHz | 2.66 GHz |
| Bus Speed | 1333 MHz FSB | 1333 MHz FSB |
| Matrizengröße | 214 mm2 | 164 mm2 |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Maximale Kerntemperatur | 71.4°C | 71.4°C |
| Anzahl der Adern | 4 | 4 |
| Anzahl der Transistoren | 820 million | 456 million |
| VID-Spannungsbereich | 0.8500V-1.3625V | 0.8500V-1.3625V |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | |
| L2 Cache | 4096 KB | |
| Maximale Gehäusetemperatur (TCase) | 71 °C | |
| Maximale Frequenz | 2.67 GHz | |
Kompatibilität |
||
| Low Halogen Options Available | ||
| Package Size | 37.5mm x 37.5mm | 37.5mm x 37.5mm |
| Unterstützte Sockel | LGA775 | LGA775 |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 95 Watt | 95 Watt |
| Maximale Anzahl von CPUs in einer Konfiguration | 1 | |
Sicherheit & Zuverlässigkeit |
||
| Execute Disable Bit (EDB) | ||
| Intel® Trusted Execution Technologie (TXT) | ||
Fortschrittliche Technologien |
||
| Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technologie | ||
| FSB-Parität | ||
| Idle States | ||
| Intel 64 | ||
| Intel® AES New Instructions | ||
| Intel® Demand Based Switching | ||
| Intel® Hyper-Threading Technologie | ||
| Intel® Turbo Boost Technologie | ||
| Thermal Monitoring | ||
Virtualisierung |
||
| Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x) | ||
| Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d) | ||
Speicher |
||
| Unterstützte Speichertypen | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | |
Navigation
Wählen Sie eine CPU
Prozessoren
Vergleiche Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 mit anderen
IntelCore 2 Quad Q9550 vs
IntelCore 2 Duo E6300
IntelCore 2 Quad Q9550 vs
AMDAthlon II X4 640
IntelCore 2 Quad Q9550 vs
AMDAthlon II X4 631
IntelCore 2 Quad Q9550 vs
IntelCeleron J1850
IntelCore 2 Quad Q9550 vs
IntelCeleron J1800
IntelCore 2 Quad Q9550 vs
AMDA4-4020
