Core 2 Quad Q9650 vs Celeron 7305
Core 2 Quad Q9650
Celeron 7305
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 Q9650 is positioned at rank 244 and the Celeron 7305 is on rank 890, so the Core 2 Quad Q9650 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 Q9650
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 7305
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core 2 Quad Q9650 | Celeron 7305 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($107) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Yorkfield (2007−2009) / 45 nm) | ✨ Modern (Alder Lake-U (2022) / Intel 7 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core 2 Quad Q9650 | Celeron 7305 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($107) |
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 Q9650 and Celeron 7305
Core 2 Quad Q9650
The Core 2 Quad Q9650 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 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 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: 2,508 points. Launch price was $249.
Celeron 7305
The Celeron 7305 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Alder Lake-U (2022) architecture. It features 5 cores and 5 threads. Max frequency: 1.1 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1744. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200, LPDDR5-5200, LPDDR4x-4267. Passmark benchmark score: 2,520 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Core 2 Quad Q9650 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron 7305 offers 5 cores / 5 threads — the Celeron 7305 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q9650 versus 1.1 GHz on the Celeron 7305 — a 92.7% clock advantage for the Core 2 Quad Q9650. The Core 2 Quad Q9650 uses the Yorkfield (2007−2009) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron 7305 uses Alder Lake-U (2022) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Quad Q9650 scores 2,508 against the Celeron 7305's 2,520 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron 7305. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Core 2 Quad Q9650 vs 8 MB (total) on the Celeron 7305.
| Feature | Core 2 Quad Q9650 | Celeron 7305 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4 | 5 / 5+25% |
| Boost Clock | 3 GHz+173% | 1.1 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 8 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB (total)+380% | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | Intel 7 nm-84% |
| Architecture | Yorkfield (2007−2009) | Alder Lake-U (2022) |
| PassMark | 2,508 | 2,520 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 1,422 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 641 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 1,598 |
Memory & Platform
The Core 2 Quad Q9650 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 7305 uses FCBGA1744 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core 2 Quad Q9650 | Celeron 7305 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | FCBGA1744 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 5.0+355% |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR5-4800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 64 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 20 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Core 2 Quad Q9650) / VT-x, VT-d (Celeron 7305). The Celeron 7305 includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics for 12th Gen), while the Core 2 Quad Q9650 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 7305 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 7305 rivals Ryzen 3 7320U.
| Feature | Core 2 Quad Q9650 | Celeron 7305 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | UHD Graphics for 12th Gen |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
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 Q9650 and Celeron 7305
