Core 2 Extreme X9100
VS
Core 2 Duo T7250

Core 2 Extreme X9100 vs Core 2 Duo T7250

Intel

Core 2 Extreme X9100

2 Cores2 Thrd44 WWMax: 0.07 GHz2008
VS
Intel

Core 2 Duo T7250

2 Cores2 Thrd2 WWMax: 2 GHz2007

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Core 2 Extreme X9100 is positioned at rank 277 and the Core 2 Duo T7250 is on rank 20, so the Core 2 Duo T7250 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Extreme X9100

#82
Core i7-11700B
MSRP: $323|Avg: $311
97%
#265
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
427%
#266
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
420%
#267
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
386%
#268
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
384%
#269
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
381%
#271
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
368%
#272
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
352%
#273
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
352%
#274
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
342%
#277
Core 2 Extreme X9100
MSRP: $851|Avg: N/A
100%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Duo T7250

#8
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
142%
#9
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
139%
#10
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
128%
#11
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
127%
#12
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
126%
#14
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
122%
#15
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
117%
#16
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
117%
#17
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
114%
#20
Core 2 Duo T7250
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#22
Core i3-3130M
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
92%
#23
Core 2 Duo T5550
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $5
88%
#24
Core 2 Duo T7100
MSRP: $197|Avg: $15
88%
#27
Pentium 2030M
MSRP: $134|Avg: N/A
84%
#28
Core 2 Duo T5750
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $8
84%
#29
Core 2 Duo T7200
MSRP: $286|Avg: $6
83%
#30
Core i5-3230M
MSRP: $225|Avg: $13
82%
#31
Atom D525
MSRP: $63|Avg: N/A
82%
#32
Atom x7835RE
MSRP: $127|Avg: N/A
82%
#33
Core 2 Duo P8400
MSRP: $209|Avg: $10
80%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Leadership: The Core 2 Duo T7250 delivers superior performance across the board. It outperforms the Core 2 Extreme X9100 in both compute-intensive tasks (0.5% faster) and gaming workloads.
InsightCore 2 Extreme X9100Core 2 Duo T7250
Gaming
Lower gaming performance
Superior gaming performance
Workstation
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Better multi-core power
Price
⚠️ Higher cost ($851)
More affordable ($0)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Penryn XE (2008) / 45 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Merom (2006−2008) / 65 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

InsightCore 2 Extreme X9100Core 2 Duo T7250
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
⚠️ Higher cost ($851)
More affordable ($0)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

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.

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core 2 Extreme X9100 and Core 2 Duo T7250

Intel

Core 2 Extreme X9100

The Core 2 Extreme X9100 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 July 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Penryn XE (2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.06 GHz, with boost up to 0.07 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 6 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 44 Watt. Memory support: DDR2, DDR3 Depends on motherboard. Passmark benchmark score: 2,063 points. Launch price was $851.

Intel

Core 2 Duo T7250

The Core 2 Duo T7250 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 2,073 points. Launch price was $249.

Processing Power

Both the Core 2 Extreme X9100 and Core 2 Duo T7250 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 0.07 GHz on the Core 2 Extreme X9100 versus 2 GHz on the Core 2 Duo T7250 — a 186.5% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo T7250 (base: 3.06 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core 2 Extreme X9100 uses the Penryn XE (2008) architecture (45 nm), while the Core 2 Duo T7250 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Extreme X9100 scores 2,063 against the Core 2 Duo T7250's 2,073 — a 0.5% lead for the Core 2 Duo T7250. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

FeatureCore 2 Extreme X9100Core 2 Duo T7250
Cores / Threads
2 / 2
2 / 2
Boost Clock
0.07 GHz
2 GHz+2757%
Base Clock
3.06 GHz+53%
2 GHz
L3 Cache
0 kB
0 kB
L2 Cache
6 MB+200%
2 MB
Process
45 nm-31%
65 nm
Architecture
Penryn XE (2008)
Merom (2006−2008)
PassMark
2,063
2,073
🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the PGA478 socket with PCIe 1.1.

FeatureCore 2 Extreme X9100Core 2 Duo T7250
Socket
PGA478
PGA478
PCIe Generation
PCIe 1.1
PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed
DDR2-667
RAM Channels
2
ECC Support
🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core 2 Extreme X9100) / VT-x (Core 2 Duo T7250). Primary use case: Core 2 Duo T7250 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Core 2 Duo T7250 rivals Athlon 64 X2 TK-42.

FeatureCore 2 Extreme X9100Core 2 Duo T7250
Integrated GPU
No
Unlocked
No
AVX-512
No
Virtualization
VT-x
Target Use
Budget