Core 2 Duo T9600
Popular choices:
Core i7-620UM
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Core 2 Duo T9600
2008Why buy it
- ✅+50% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 4 MB).
- ✅Draws 6W instead of 18W, a 12W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (1,087 vs 1,091).
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-620UM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i7-620UM
2010Why buy it
- ✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake), while Core 2 Duo T9600 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 6 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $278 MSRP, while Core 2 Duo T9600 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌200% higher power demand at 18W vs 6W.
Core 2 Duo T9600
2008Core i7-620UM
2010Why buy it
- ✅+50% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 4 MB).
- ✅Draws 6W instead of 18W, a 12W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake), while Core 2 Duo T9600 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (1,087 vs 1,091).
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-620UM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 6 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $278 MSRP, while Core 2 Duo T9600 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌200% higher power demand at 18W vs 6W.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i7-620UM better than Core 2 Duo T9600?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core 2 Duo T9600 | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core 2 Duo T9600 | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 23 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 17 FPS |
League of Legends
| Preset | Core 2 Duo T9600 | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
Valorant
| Preset | Core 2 Duo T9600 | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core 2 Duo T9600 and Core i7-620UM
Core 2 Duo T9600
Core 2 Duo T9600
The Core 2 Duo T9600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 July 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 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: 1,087 points. Launch price was $316.
Core i7-620UM
Core i7-620UM
The Core i7-620UM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.06 GHz, with boost up to 2.13 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 1,091 points. Launch price was $278.
Processing Power
The Core 2 Duo T9600 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i7-620UM's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Core 2 Duo T9600 versus 2.13 GHz on the Core i7-620UM — a 27.2% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo T9600 (base: 2.8 GHz vs 1.06 GHz). The Core 2 Duo T9600 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Core i7-620UM uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo T9600 scores 1,087 against the Core i7-620UM's 1,091 — a 0.4% lead for the Core i7-620UM. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Duo T9600 vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i7-620UM.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo T9600 | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 2.8 GHz+31% | 2.13 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.8 GHz+164% | 1.06 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 6 MB L2 Cache+50% | 4 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB+2300% | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 32 nm-29% |
| Architecture | Penryn (2008−2011) | Arrandale (2010−2011) |
| PassMark | 1,087 | 1,091 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 350 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 700 |
Memory & Platform
The Core 2 Duo T9600 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core i7-620UM uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo T9600 | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | BGA1288 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR3-1066 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | No |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Core 2 Duo T9600) / VT-x (Core i7-620UM). The Core i7-620UM includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake)), while the Core 2 Duo T9600 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-620UM targets Ultra-Portable Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i7-620UM rivals Core 2 Duo SU9600.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo T9600 | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake) |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | VT-x |
| Target Use | — | Ultra-Portable Laptop |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core 2 Duo T9600 and Core i7-620UM
