Core 2 Quad Q9000 vs Celeron 1007U
Core 2 Quad Q9000
Celeron 1007U
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 Quad Q9000 is positioned at rank 1216 and the Celeron 1007U is on rank 99, so the Celeron 1007U offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Quad Q9000
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 1007U
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core 2 Quad Q9000 | Celeron 1007U |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn (2008−2011) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core 2 Quad Q9000 | Celeron 1007U |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
Performance Check
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 Quad Q9000 and Celeron 1007U
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.
Celeron 1007U
The Celeron 1007U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,610 points. Launch price was $86.
Processing Power
The Core 2 Quad Q9000 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron 1007U offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Core 2 Quad Q9000 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q9000 versus 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 1007U — a 28.6% clock advantage for the Core 2 Quad Q9000 (base: 2 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The Core 2 Quad Q9000 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron 1007U uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Quad Q9000 scores 1,597 against the Celeron 1007U's 1,610 — a 0.8% lead for the Celeron 1007U. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Quad Q9000 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1007U.
| Feature | Core 2 Quad Q9000 | Celeron 1007U |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4+100% | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2 GHz+33% | 1.5 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2 GHz+33% | 1.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 6 MB L2 Cache+200% | 2 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB+2300% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 22 nm-51% |
| Architecture | Penryn (2008−2011) | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,597 | 1,610 |
Memory & Platform
The Core 2 Quad Q9000 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 1007U uses BGA1023 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core 2 Quad Q9000 | Celeron 1007U |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | BGA1023 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 3.0+173% |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR3-1600 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 32 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 16 |
Advanced Features
The Celeron 1007U includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Core 2 Quad Q9000 requires a dedicated GPU.
| Feature | Core 2 Quad Q9000 | Celeron 1007U |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) |
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 Quad Q9000 and Celeron 1007U
