A4-3305M vs Core 2 Duo T9500

A4-3305M vs Core 2 Duo T9500 Performance Spectrum

A4-3305M

2 / 2

1,812

+0.7%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core 2 Duo T9500

2 / 2

1,799

0.0%

Pentium E5400

Celeron M U3400

Pentium M 725

Pentium Dual Core T2370

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.

A4-3305M vs Core 2 Duo T9500 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.

A4-3305M vs Core 2 Duo T9500: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-3305M

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6480G, while Core 2 Duo T9500 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌483.3% higher power demand at 35W vs 6W.

Core 2 Duo T9500

2008

Why buy it

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

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,799 vs 1,812).
❌No integrated graphics, while A4-3305M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-3305M better than Core 2 Duo T9500?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core 2 Duo T9500 is ahead with a 2.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, A4-3305M pulls ahead with 0.7% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A4-3305M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A4-3305M still makes the most sense overall. A4-3305M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.7% better PassMark.

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

A4-3305M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A4-3305M vs Core 2 Duo T9500 Technical Specifications

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

A4-3305M

The A4-3305M 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: 512K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,812 points. Launch price was $50.

Core 2 Duo T9500

The Core 2 Duo T9500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 10 January 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 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: 1,799 points. Launch price was $530.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-3305M and Core 2 Duo T9500 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-3305M versus 2.6 GHz on the Core 2 Duo T9500 — a 3.9% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo T9500 (base: 1.9 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The A4-3305M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core 2 Duo T9500 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3305M scores 1,812 against the Core 2 Duo T9500's 1,799 — a 0.7% lead for the A4-3305M. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A4-3305M vs 6 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Duo T9500.

Feature	A4-3305M	Core 2 Duo T9500
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz	2.6 GHz+4%
Base Clock	1.9 GHz	2.6 GHz+37%
L3 Cache	0 kB	6 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+8433%	6 MB
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	1,812	1,799
Geekbench 6 Single	276	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-3305M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core 2 Duo T9500 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A4-3305M versus DDR3-1066 on the Core 2 Duo T9500 — the A4-3305M supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support.

Feature	A4-3305M	Core 2 Duo T9500
Socket	FS1	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+25%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3305M) vs VT-x (Core 2 Duo T9500). The A4-3305M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6480G), while the Core 2 Duo T9500 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3305M targets Budget Laptop, Core 2 Duo T9500 targets Budget. Direct competitor: A4-3305M rivals Pentium B950; Core 2 Duo T9500 rivals Athlon Silver 3050U.