Core 2 Quad Q9400 vs A10-5750M

Core 2 Quad Q9400

4 Cores4 Thrd95 WWMax: 2.67 GHz2008

A10-5750M

4 Cores4 Thrd35 WWMax: 3.5 GHz2013

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core 2 Quad Q9400

4 / 4

2,160

0.0%

2,174

+0.6%

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.

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 Q9400 is positioned at rank 1003 and the A10-5750M is on rank 1227, so the Core 2 Quad Q9400 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 Quad Q9400

Ryzen 9 7950X

MSRP: $194|Avg: $20

33056%

Core i9-10900T

MSRP: $120|Avg: $5

31234%

Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE

MSRP: $423|Avg: $5

22679%

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85

6832%

Ryzen 9 9950X

MSRP: $649|Avg: $129

5412%

Ryzen 5 8400F

MSRP: $303|Avg: $55

4734%

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700

MSRP: $299|Avg: $60

2712%

Ryzen 5 2600X

MSRP: $229|Avg: $55

2676%

Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

2437%

#10

Core Ultra 5 245KF

MSRP: $294|Avg: $189

2436%

#11

Ryzen 5 5500

MSRP: $159|Avg: $85

2409%

#12

Ryzen 5 3600

MSRP: $199|Avg: $80

2344%

#13

Core i3-9100E

MSRP: $202|Avg: $30

2311%

#14

Core Ultra 5 245K

MSRP: $319|Avg: $200

2302%

#15

Core i3-8300T

MSRP: $138|Avg: $25

2281%

#1003

Core 2 Quad Q9400

MSRP: $229|Avg: $25

100%

#1004

Celeron 450

MSRP: $53|Avg: $5

99%

#1005

Core i5-655K

MSRP: $216|Avg: $55

99%

#1006

Core 2 Duo E4600

MSRP: $133|Avg: $9.6

99%

#1008

Core i7-870S

MSRP: $300|Avg: $80

98%

#1009

Core 2 Duo E6540

MSRP: $163|Avg: $15

97%

#1010

Celeron 430

MSRP: $49|Avg: $10

97%

#1011

Athlon X2 BE-2300

MSRP: $100|Avg: $80

96%

#1012

Core i7-875K

MSRP: $353|Avg: $175

95%

#1013

Core i5-670

MSRP: $284|Avg: $100

95%

#1014

Core i5-680

MSRP: $294|Avg: $10

94%

#1015

Core 2 Duo E4300

MSRP: $113|Avg: $5

94%

#1017

Core 2 Duo E4500

MSRP: $133|Avg: $10

93%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar A10-5750M

#1215

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

7428%

#1216

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

7319%

#1217

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

6719%

#1218

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

6689%

#1219

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

6627%

#1221

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

6400%

#1222

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

6137%

#1223

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

6127%

#1224

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

5962%

#1227

A10-5750M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#1228

Core i7-620UM

MSRP: $278|Avg: N/A

99%

#1230

Celeron 570

MSRP: $134|Avg: $15

95%

#1231

Core i7-820QM

MSRP: $546|Avg: N/A

84%

#1233

Core Duo T2700

MSRP: $663|Avg: N/A

71%

#1235

Pentium SU4100

MSRP: $289|Avg: $15

60%

#1236

Core Solo T1400

MSRP: $200|Avg: $5

54%

#1237

Core i7-940XM

MSRP: $1096|Avg: N/A

52%

#1238

Core Solo T1350

MSRP: $200|Avg: $70

51%

#1240

Core Solo T1300

MSRP: $209|Avg: $10

47%

#1241

Core Solo T1200

MSRP: $209|Avg: $10

43%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Leadership: The A10-5750M delivers superior performance across the board. It outperforms the Core 2 Quad Q9400 in both compute-intensive tasks (0.6% faster) and gaming workloads.

Insight	Core 2 Quad Q9400	A10-5750M
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($25)	✅ More affordable ($0)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Yorkfield (2007−2009) / 45 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Richland (2013−2014) / 32 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Insight	Core 2 Quad Q9400	A10-5750M
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($25)	✅ 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.

Core 2 Quad Q9400 Benchmark Check

A10-5750M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core 2 Quad Q9400 and A10-5750M

Core 2 Quad Q9400

The Core 2 Quad Q9400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Yorkfield (2007−2009) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 2.67 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 6 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,160 points. Launch price was $249.

A10-5750M

The A10-5750M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,174 points. Launch price was $130.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core 2 Quad Q9400 and A10-5750M share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.67 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q9400 versus 3.5 GHz on the A10-5750M — a 26.9% clock advantage for the A10-5750M (base: 2.66 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Core 2 Quad Q9400 uses the Yorkfield (2007−2009) architecture (45 nm), while the A10-5750M uses Richland (2013−2014) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Quad Q9400 scores 2,160 against the A10-5750M's 2,174 — a 0.6% lead for the A10-5750M. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Core 2 Quad Q9400	A10-5750M
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2.67 GHz	3.5 GHz+31%
Base Clock	2.66 GHz+6%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	6 MB (total)+500%	1 MB (per core)
Process	45 nm	32 nm-29%
Architecture	Yorkfield (2007−2009)	Richland (2013−2014)
PassMark	2,160	2,174
Geekbench 6 Single	—	320
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	707

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 2 Quad Q9400 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the A10-5750M uses FS1r2 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1066 memory speed. The A10-5750M supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Core 2 Quad Q9400) vs 16 (A10-5750M) — the A10-5750M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Core 2 Quad Q9400	A10-5750M
Socket	LGA775	FS1r2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066	DDR3-1866
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	32 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	❌	❌
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Core 2 Quad Q9400) vs AMD-V (A10-5750M). The A10-5750M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 8650G), while the Core 2 Quad Q9400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core 2 Quad Q9400 targets Desktop, A10-5750M targets Legacy Laptop. Direct competitor: A10-5750M rivals Core i3-3110M.