Core 2 Extreme QX9300 vs Turion 64 X2 TL-66

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 vs Turion 64 X2 TL-66 Performance Spectrum

Core 2 Extreme QX9300

4 / 4

1,805

0.0%

Pentium 2117U

Pentium N3540

Celeron 1020E

Pentium Dual Core T2370

1,808

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 vs Turion 64 X2 TL-66 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.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 vs Turion 64 X2 TL-66: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core 2 Extreme QX9300

2008

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,805 vs 1,808).
❌1100% higher power demand at 12W vs 1W.

Turion 64 X2 TL-66

2007

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 1W instead of 12W, a 11W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Turion 64 X2 TL-66 better than Core 2 Extreme QX9300?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core 2 Extreme QX9300 is ahead with a 0.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Turion 64 X2 TL-66 pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Turion 64 X2 TL-66 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Turion 64 X2 TL-66 still makes the most sense overall. Turion 64 X2 TL-66 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.2% better PassMark.

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

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2008 vs 2007). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 vs Turion 64 X2 TL-66 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Turion 64 X2 TL-66

The Turion 64 X2 TL-66 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Brisbane (2007−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.3 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,808 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core 2 Extreme QX9300 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Turion 64 X2 TL-66 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Core 2 Extreme QX9300 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.53 GHz on the Core 2 Extreme QX9300 versus 2.3 GHz on the Turion 64 X2 TL-66 — a 9.5% clock advantage for the Core 2 Extreme QX9300. The Core 2 Extreme QX9300 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Turion 64 X2 TL-66 uses Brisbane (2007−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Extreme QX9300 scores 1,805 against the Turion 64 X2 TL-66's 1,808 — a 0.2% lead for the Turion 64 X2 TL-66.

Feature	Core 2 Extreme QX9300	Turion 64 X2 TL-66
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.53 GHz+10%	2.3 GHz
Base Clock	2.53 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	12 MB+1100%	1 MB
Process	45 nm-31%	65 nm
Architecture	Penryn (2008−2011)	Brisbane (2007−2008)
PassMark	1,805	1,808