Core 2 Quad Q9400 vs Pro A10-8700B

Core 2 Quad Q9400 vs Pro A10-8700B Performance Spectrum

Core 2 Quad Q9400

4 / 4

2,160

0.0%

2,170

+0.5%

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 Quad Q9400 vs Pro A10-8700B 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 Quad Q9400 vs Pro A10-8700B: 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 Quad Q9400

2008

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,160 vs 2,170).
❌Launch MSRP is still $229 MSRP, while Pro A10-8700B mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌4650% higher power demand at 95W vs 2W.

Pro A10-8700B

2015

Why buy it

✅Draws 2W instead of 95W, a 93W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Pro A10-8700B better than Core 2 Quad Q9400?

Yes. Pro A10-8700B is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.5% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Pro A10-8700B is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.3% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Pro A10-8700B is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Pro A10-8700B is still the much better call for a fresh build. Pro A10-8700B comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $229 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core 2 Quad Q9400 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2008 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (9.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA775.

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

Pro A10-8700B makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core 2 Quad Q9400 vs Pro A10-8700B Technical Specifications

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

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.

Pro A10-8700B

The Pro A10-8700B is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 3 June 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Carrizo (2015−2018) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3/DDR3L-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 2,170 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core 2 Quad Q9400 and Pro A10-8700B share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.67 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q9400 versus 3.2 GHz on the Pro A10-8700B — a 18.1% clock advantage for the Pro A10-8700B (base: 2.66 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The Core 2 Quad Q9400 uses the Yorkfield (2007−2009) architecture (45 nm), while the Pro A10-8700B uses Carrizo (2015−2018) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Quad Q9400 scores 2,160 against the Pro A10-8700B's 2,170 — a 0.5% lead for the Pro A10-8700B.

Feature	Core 2 Quad Q9400	Pro A10-8700B
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2.67 GHz	3.2 GHz+20%
Base Clock	2.66 GHz+48%	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	6 MB (total)+200%	2048 kB
Process	45 nm	28 nm-38%
Architecture	Yorkfield (2007−2009)	Carrizo (2015−2018)
PassMark	2,160	2,170

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 2 Quad Q9400 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Pro A10-8700B uses FP4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.