Celeron G1820T vs Core 2 Quad Q9000

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.

Celeron G1820T vs Core 2 Quad Q9000 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.

Celeron G1820T vs Core 2 Quad Q9000: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron G1820T

2013

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Haswell), while Core 2 Quad Q9000 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 6 MB).
❌800% higher power demand at 54W vs 6W.

Core 2 Quad Q9000

2009

Why buy it

✅+100% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Draws 6W instead of 54W, a 48W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,597 vs 1,599).
❌Launch MSRP is still $348 MSRP, while Celeron G1820T mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G1820T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G1820T better than Core 2 Quad Q9000?

Yes. Celeron G1820T is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.1% 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, Celeron G1820T is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.1% 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, Celeron G1820T is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron G1820T is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron G1820T comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $348 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core 2 Quad Q9000 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2009 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (4.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA478.

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

Celeron G1820T makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron G1820T vs Core 2 Quad Q9000 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron G1820T

The Celeron G1820T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 December 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,599 points. Launch price was $42.

Core 2 Quad Q9000

The Core 2 Quad Q9000 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 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 6 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,597 points. Launch price was $348.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G1820T packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Core 2 Quad Q9000 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Core 2 Quad Q9000 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron G1820T versus 2 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q9000 — a 18.2% clock advantage for the Celeron G1820T (base: 2.4 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Celeron G1820T uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Core 2 Quad Q9000 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G1820T scores 1,599 against the Core 2 Quad Q9000's 1,597 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron G1820T. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Celeron G1820T vs 6 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Quad Q9000.

Feature	Celeron G1820T	Core 2 Quad Q9000
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+20%	2 GHz
Base Clock	2.4 GHz+20%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	6 MB L2 Cache+100%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	6 MB+2300%
Process	22 nm-51%	45 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	1,599	1,597
Geekbench 6 Single	415	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	629	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G1820T uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Quad Q9000 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron G1820T	Core 2 Quad Q9000
Socket	LGA1150	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron G1820T) / not specified (Core 2 Quad Q9000). The Celeron G1820T includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Haswell)), while the Core 2 Quad Q9000 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G1820T targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G1820T rivals Pentium G3220T.