A4-3300M vs Core 2 Duo T9800

A4-3300M vs Core 2 Duo T9800 Performance Spectrum

A4-3300M

2 / 2

1,186

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core 2 Duo T9800

2 / 2

1,189

+0.3%

Atom E3827

Celeron B820

Celeron P4505

Celeron Dual-Core T1700

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

A4-3300M vs Core 2 Duo T9800 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A4-3300M vs Core 2 Duo T9800: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A4-3300M

2011

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6480G, while Core 2 Duo T9800 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,186 vs 1,189).
❌483.3% higher power demand at 35W vs 6W.

Core 2 Duo T9800

2009

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 35W, a 29W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while A4-3300M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core 2 Duo T9800 better than A4-3300M?

Yes. Core 2 Duo T9800 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.3% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core 2 Duo T9800 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.9% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Duo T9800 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core 2 Duo T9800 still makes the most sense overall. Core 2 Duo T9800 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

A4-3300M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-3300M vs Core 2 Duo T9800 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A4-3300M

The A4-3300M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,186 points. Launch price was $50.

Core 2 Duo T9800

The Core 2 Duo T9800 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.93 GHz, with boost up to 2.92 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 6 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,189 points. Launch price was $530.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-3300M and Core 2 Duo T9800 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-3300M versus 2.92 GHz on the Core 2 Duo T9800 — a 15.5% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo T9800 (base: 1.9 GHz vs 2.93 GHz). The A4-3300M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core 2 Duo T9800 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3300M scores 1,186 against the Core 2 Duo T9800's 1,189 — a 0.3% lead for the Core 2 Duo T9800. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A4-3300M vs 6 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Duo T9800.

Feature	A4-3300M	Core 2 Duo T9800
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz	2.92 GHz+17%
Base Clock	1.9 GHz	2.93 GHz+54%
L3 Cache	0 kB	6 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	6 MB+500%
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	1,186	1,189
Geekbench 6 Single	256	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-3300M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core 2 Duo T9800 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	A4-3300M	Core 2 Duo T9800
Socket	FS1	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A4-3300M) / not specified (Core 2 Duo T9800). The A4-3300M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6480G), while the Core 2 Duo T9800 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3300M targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A4-3300M rivals Pentium B940.