
Core 2 Quad Q9400 vs Core m3-6Y30

Core 2 Quad Q9400

Core m3-6Y30
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 Q9400 is positioned at rank 1003 and the Core m3-6Y30 is on rank 1136, so the Core 2 Quad Q9400 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 Q9400
Performance Per Dollar Core m3-6Y30
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core 2 Quad Q9400 | Core m3-6Y30 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($25) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($281) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Yorkfield (2007−2009) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Skylake-Y (2015) / 14 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core 2 Quad Q9400 | Core m3-6Y30 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+1014%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($25) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($281) |
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 Q9400 and Core m3-6Y30

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.

Core m3-6Y30
The Core m3-6Y30 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake-Y (2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 0.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1515. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,180 points. Launch price was $281.
Processing Power
The Core 2 Quad Q9400 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core m3-6Y30 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Core 2 Quad Q9400 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.67 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q9400 versus 2.2 GHz on the Core m3-6Y30 — a 19.3% clock advantage for the Core 2 Quad Q9400 (base: 2.66 GHz vs 0.9 GHz). The Core 2 Quad Q9400 uses the Yorkfield (2007−2009) architecture (45 nm), while the Core m3-6Y30 uses Skylake-Y (2015) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Quad Q9400 scores 2,160 against the Core m3-6Y30's 2,180 — a 0.9% lead for the Core m3-6Y30. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Core 2 Quad Q9400 vs 4 MB (total) on the Core m3-6Y30.
| Feature | Core 2 Quad Q9400 | Core m3-6Y30 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4+100% | 2 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 2.67 GHz+21% | 2.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.66 GHz+196% | 0.9 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 4 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB (total)+2300% | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 14 nm-69% |
| Architecture | Yorkfield (2007−2009) | Skylake-Y (2015) |
| PassMark | 2,160 | 2,180 |
Memory & Platform
The Core 2 Quad Q9400 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core m3-6Y30 uses FCBGA1515 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core 2 Quad Q9400 | Core m3-6Y30 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | FCBGA1515 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 3.0+173% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1066 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | ❌ | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x (Core 2 Quad Q9400) / not specified (Core m3-6Y30). Primary use case: Core 2 Quad Q9400 targets Desktop.
| Feature | Core 2 Quad Q9400 | Core m3-6Y30 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x | — |
| Target Use | Desktop | — |
Value Analysis
The Core 2 Quad Q9400 launched at $229 MSRP, while the Core m3-6Y30 debuted at $281. At current prices ($25 vs $281), the Core 2 Quad Q9400 is $256 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Core 2 Quad Q9400 delivers 86.4 pts/$ vs 7.8 pts/$ for the Core m3-6Y30 — making the Core 2 Quad Q9400 the 167% better value option.
| Feature | Core 2 Quad Q9400 | Core m3-6Y30 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $229-19% | $281 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $25-91% | $281 |
| Performance per Dollar | 86.4+1008% | 7.8 |
| Release Date | 2008 | 2015 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.















