A6-7470K vs Core 2 Quad Q8200

A6-7470K vs Core 2 Quad Q8200 Performance Spectrum

A6-7470K

2 / 2

1,799

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core 2 Quad Q8200

4 / 4

1,807

+0.4%

Core 2 Duo E4700

Core i5-430M

Pentium Dual Core SU4100

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.

A6-7470K vs Core 2 Quad Q8200 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.

A6-7470K vs Core 2 Quad Q8200: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-7470K

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 95W, a 30W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R5 Graphics, while Core 2 Quad Q8200 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Core 2 Quad Q8200.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,799 vs 1,807).

Core 2 Quad Q8200

2008

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $224 MSRP, while A6-7470K mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌46.2% higher power demand at 95W vs 65W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A6-7470K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A6-7470K.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-7470K better than Core 2 Quad Q8200?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A6-7470K is ahead with a 0.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Quad Q8200 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Quad Q8200 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

A6-7470K is still the much better call for a fresh build. A6-7470K comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $224 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core 2 Quad Q8200 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2008 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (8.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA775.

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

A6-7470K makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A6-7470K vs Core 2 Quad Q8200 Technical Specifications

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

A6-7470K

The A6-7470K is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Godaveri (2014−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FM2+. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 1,799 points. Launch price was $70.

Core 2 Quad Q8200

The Core 2 Quad Q8200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Yorkfield (2007−2009) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.33 GHz, with boost up to 2.33 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,807 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-7470K packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Core 2 Quad Q8200 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Core 2 Quad Q8200 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the A6-7470K versus 2.33 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q8200 — a 52.8% clock advantage for the A6-7470K (base: 3.7 GHz vs 2.33 GHz). The A6-7470K uses the Godaveri (2014−2016) architecture (28 nm), while the Core 2 Quad Q8200 uses Yorkfield (2007−2009) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A6-7470K scores 1,799 against the Core 2 Quad Q8200's 1,807 — a 0.4% lead for the Core 2 Quad Q8200.

Feature	A6-7470K	Core 2 Quad Q8200
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	4 GHz+72%	2.33 GHz
Base Clock	3.7 GHz+59%	2.33 GHz
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	1024 kB	4 MB (total)+300%
Process	28 nm-38%	45 nm
Architecture	Godaveri (2014−2016)	Yorkfield (2007−2009)
PassMark	1,799	1,807

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-7470K uses the FM2+ socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Quad Q8200 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 2133 on the A6-7470K versus DDR3-1333 on the Core 2 Quad Q8200 — the A6-7470K supports 60% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A6-7470K supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.

Feature	A6-7470K	Core 2 Quad Q8200
Socket	FM2+	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	2133+60%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the A6-7470K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: true (A6-7470K) vs VT-x (Core 2 Quad Q8200). The A6-7470K includes integrated graphics (Radeon R5 Graphics), while the Core 2 Quad Q8200 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core 2 Quad Q8200 targets Desktop. Direct competitor: A6-7470K rivals Pentium G4400.