A8-5550M vs Core 2 Extreme QX9300

A8-5550M vs Core 2 Extreme QX9300 Performance Spectrum

A8-5550M

4 / 4

1,811

+0.3%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core 2 Extreme QX9300

4 / 4

1,805

0.0%

Pentium 2117U

Pentium N3540

Celeron 1020E

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.

A8-5550M vs Core 2 Extreme QX9300 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.

A8-5550M vs Core 2 Extreme QX9300: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A8-5550M

2013

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 8510G / 8550G, while Core 2 Extreme QX9300 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌191.7% higher power demand at 35W vs 12W.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300

2008

Why buy it

✅Draws 12W instead of 35W, a 23W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,805 vs 1,811).
❌No integrated graphics, while A8-5550M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A8-5550M better than Core 2 Extreme QX9300?

Yes. A8-5550M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.3% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A8-5550M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.5% 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, A8-5550M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

A8-5550M still makes the most sense overall. A8-5550M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

A8-5550M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A8-5550M vs Core 2 Extreme QX9300 Technical Specifications

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

A8-5550M

The A8-5550M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,811 points. Launch price was $90.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300

The Core 2 Extreme QX9300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.53 GHz, with boost up to 2.53 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 12 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,805 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A8-5550M and Core 2 Extreme QX9300 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.1 GHz on the A8-5550M versus 2.53 GHz on the Core 2 Extreme QX9300 — a 20.2% clock advantage for the A8-5550M (base: 2.1 GHz vs 2.53 GHz). The A8-5550M uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Core 2 Extreme QX9300 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A8-5550M scores 1,811 against the Core 2 Extreme QX9300's 1,805 — a 0.3% lead for the A8-5550M. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A8-5550M	Core 2 Extreme QX9300
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.1 GHz+23%	2.53 GHz
Base Clock	2.1 GHz	2.53 GHz+20%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	12 MB+1100%
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	1,811	1,805

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A8-5550M uses the FS1r2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Extreme QX9300 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	A8-5550M	Core 2 Extreme QX9300
Socket	FS1r2	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	16	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (A8-5550M) / not specified (Core 2 Extreme QX9300). The A8-5550M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 8510G / 8550G), while the Core 2 Extreme QX9300 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: A8-5550M rivals Core i3-4000M.