AMD A10-7700K vs Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 Comparison

The AMD A10-7700K and the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 represent two distinct approaches to desktop computing from different eras. The AMD part, a Kaveri APU built on a 28 nm process, integrates Radeon R7 graphics and relies on a 3.40 GHz base clock with a 3.80 GHz boost. The Intel part, a Yorkfield XE from the Core 2 Extreme family, operates at a fixed 3.20 GHz and was manufactured on Intel's 45 nm node. Both processors have four cores and four threads, and both carry unlocked multipliers, but the database shows they land at nearly identical average benchmark scores: 801 for the AMD A10-7700K and 790 for the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770. This places them in the 22nd and 21st percentiles of all CPUs respectively, indicating that neither part is a performance leader in the current landscape. The data available for direct comparison is limited, as the two chips were tested under different benchmark suites, so the analysis relies on their recorded scores within their respective test groups and their positions among nearest rivals.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain a shared benchmark suite where both CPUs ran the same test, so a direct apples-to-apples comparison is not possible from the recorded measurements. Instead, each processor must be evaluated against its own set of results. The AMD A10-7700K has two Geekbench entries: a multicore score of 1155 and a singlecore score of 447. The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 has a set of Cinebench scores across multiple versions: 231 in Cinebench R15 multicore, 963 in Cinebench R20 multicore, 136 in Cinebench R20 singlecore, 2295 in Cinebench R23 multicore, and 324 in Cinebench R23 singlecore. These numbers cannot be converted across suites, but they provide a profile of each chip's behavior in its respective workload.

Looking at the AMD A10-7700K's Geekbench results, the multicore score of 1155 is roughly 2.6 times its singlecore score of 447. That ratio suggests that the quad-core design scales reasonably well in threaded workloads, though the absolute numbers are modest. The average benchmark score of 801 places it in a cluster with the Intel Xeon E5530 and the Intel Pentium Silver J5040, both of which also average 801, meaning a delta of 0 percent. The nearest rivals with higher scores are the Intel Core i5-3320M at 803, which is 0.2 percent ahead, and the AMD Ryzen 3 2200U at 805, which is 0.5 percent ahead. These deltas are tiny, all within a fraction of a percent, so the A10-7700K is effectively tied with a group of low-power mobile and older desktop parts. The data shows that the A10-7700K sits at the 22nd percentile, meaning roughly 78 percent of all CPUs in the database outperform it.

The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 presents a different picture. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 2295 is substantially higher than its R23 singlecore score of 324, a ratio of about 7.1 times. That is a much larger scaling factor than the AMD part shows in Geekbench, which indicates that the old Yorkfield design benefits heavily from multithreading in the Cinebench render workload. The R20 results follow a similar pattern: 963 multicore versus 136 singlecore, again a ratio near 7.1. The R15 multicore score of 231 fits the same trend. The average benchmark score is 790, which places it at the 21st percentile. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 at 789, which is 0.1 percent behind, and the AMD Opteron 3350 HE at 789, also 0.1 percent behind. On the higher side, the Intel Core i5-4210U at 788 is 0.3 percent behind, and the Intel Core i5-3610ME at 788 is 0.3 percent behind. Note that the QX9770's average of 790 is actually higher than some of its listed rivals despite the delta percentages being expressed from the rival's perspective, so the QX9770 leads its immediate comparison group by a narrow margin.

The biggest wins each way are therefore contextual rather than direct. The AMD A10-7700K wins in the sense that its average score of 801 is 1.4 percent higher than the Intel QX9770's 790, a small but measurable edge in the database's aggregate metric. The A10-7700K also holds a higher percentile ranking at 22 versus 21. On the other hand, the QX9770 demonstrates far stronger multicore scaling in its own test suite, with R23 multicore reaching 2295 against only 324 singlecore, which suggests that applications leveraging all four cores will extract much more from the Intel chip relative to its own single-threaded baseline. The AMD part's Geekbench multicore of 1155 versus singlecore of 447 shows a scaling factor of only 2.6, indicating that its additional cores contribute less relative uplift in that workload. Neither chip has a win count in the head-to-head benchmark array, as the database lists zero wins for each, so the comparison hinges on the aggregate scores and the internal consistency of each chip's results.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the AMD A10-7700K is the marginally better chip overall. Its average benchmark score of 801 tops the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770's 790 by 11 points, and it occupies the 22nd percentile versus the 21st. The A10-7700K also has distinct architectural advantages that the data supports: it was released later, it uses a smaller 28 nm process node compared to Intel's 45 nm, and it integrates Radeon R7 graphics, which the QX9770 lacks entirely. The QX9770's integrated graphics are described only as a chipset feature on certain motherboards, meaning the CPU itself does not contain a graphics core. For a user building a system without a discrete GPU, the A10-7700K is the only viable option of the two based on the available specifications.

However, the verdict is not one-sided. The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 shows exceptional multicore scaling in Cinebench, with R23 multicore at 2295 representing over seven times its singlecore score. This indicates that in heavily threaded render workloads, the QX9770 can deliver a strong response from its four cores. But the absolute Cinebench numbers are low compared to modern parts, and the chip's 136 W TDP is substantially higher than the AMD's 95 W, meaning the Intel part draws more power for a lower aggregate score. The QX9770 also supports DDR1, DDR2, and DDR3 memory, while the A10-7700K supports DDR3 only, but the Intel part has no recorded memory bandwidth figure in the database, so its memory performance cannot be quantified. The AMD part lists a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, which gives it a concrete advantage in that metric.

Who should pick which? Strictly from the data, a user focused on the aggregate benchmark average and integrated graphics should choose the AMD A10-7700K. It scores higher on average, runs cooler at 95 W against 136 W, and includes a built-in Radeon R7 GPU. A user who prioritizes multicore rendering in Cinebench-style workloads and does not need integrated graphics might look more favorably on the Intel QX9770, given its strong scaling pattern, but the lack of a direct comparison means that preference is speculative rather than confirmed by a shared test. The data does not support declaring the Intel part the winner in any measured head-to-head category, since no head-to-head benchmarks exist and its average score is lower. Therefore, the AMD A10-7700K stands as the recommended part for most purposes based on the recorded measurements.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD A10-7700K uses the Steamroller architecture under the Kaveri codename, built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 2,411 million transistors on a die size of 245 mm². The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 uses the Core 2 architecture under the Yorkfield codename, built on a 45 nm process at Intel. It contains 820 million transistors spread across a die size listed as 2x 107 mm², which reflects its multi-chip module design. The transistor counts differ by roughly threefold, with the AMD part carrying far more transistors on a smaller process node, which accounts for its integrated graphics and newer feature set.

Cache configurations also differ sharply. The A10-7700K has 256 KB of L1 cache and 4 MB of L2 cache, with no L3 cache present. The QX9770 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, which totals 256 KB across four cores, and a 12 MB shared L2 cache. The Intel part therefore has three times the L2 capacity of the AMD part, which is a meaningful difference for workloads that benefit from large on-chip caches. Neither processor has an L3 cache, so the entire cache hierarchy consists of L1 and L2 levels only.

Memory support varies as well. The A10-7700K supports DDR3 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a stated memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The QX9770 supports DDR1, DDR2, and DDR3 memory in a dual-channel configuration, but the database lists no memory bandwidth figure for it. The AMD part also uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part uses PCIe Gen 2, a full generation older. The AMD A10-7700K includes integrated Radeon R7 graphics, while the QX9770 has no on-die GPU, with any display output relying on a chipset feature on certain motherboards. Both chips support only non-ECC memory, and both have unlocked multipliers.

The sockets are incompatible: the A10-7700K fits AMD Socket FM2+, while the QX9770 fits Intel Socket 775. The production status for both is end-of-life, and both were released in different years, with the AMD part coming later. The AMD chip has a 95 W TDP, while the Intel chip has a 136 W TDP, so the AMD part has a 41 W thermal advantage. The process node difference, 28 nm versus 45 nm, is substantial and contributes to the efficiency gap.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD A10-7700K has an average benchmark score of 801, while the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 has an average of 790. The AMD part is 11 points higher.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both the AMD A10-7700K and the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 have 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Does the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 have integrated graphics?

A: No. The QX9770 has integrated graphics only as a chipset feature on certain motherboards, meaning the CPU itself does not include a graphics core. The AMD A10-7700K includes Radeon R7 integrated graphics.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD A10-7700K has a TDP of 95 W, while the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 has a TDP of 136 W. The AMD part consumes 41 W less.

Q: Which processor has more L2 cache?

A: The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 has 12 MB of shared L2 cache, while the AMD A10-7700K has 4 MB of L2 cache. The Intel part has three times the L2 capacity.

Q: What memory types does each CPU support?

A: The AMD A10-7700K supports DDR3 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 supports DDR1, DDR2, and DDR3 memory in a dual-channel configuration, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded for it.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD A10-7700K wins in overall aggregate performance. Its average benchmark score of 801 exceeds the QX9770's 790, and its 22nd percentile ranking is one point higher than the Intel part's 21st. The AMD chip also wins on thermal efficiency, with a 95 W TDP versus 136 W, and on process technology, using 28 nm versus 45 nm. The integrated Radeon R7 graphics give it a decisive advantage for systems without a discrete GPU, as the QX9770 has no on-die graphics. The AMD part also lists a concrete memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, which the Intel part lacks in the database. For general desktop use, the A10-7700K is the stronger choice based on the recorded metrics.

The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 wins in cache capacity, offering 12 MB of shared L2 against the A10-7700K's 4 MB. This could benefit workloads with high data reuse, though the database does not include a benchmark that isolates cache performance. The QX9770 also demonstrates far better multicore scaling in its Cinebench results, with R23 multicore at 2295 versus 324 singlecore, a ratio of over seven. That pattern suggests the four cores are effectively utilized in render workloads. The Intel part also supports a wider range of memory types, including DDR1, DDR2, and DDR3, which offers flexibility for older platforms. However, the QX9770's lack of integrated graphics and higher TDP are clear drawbacks.

In specific use cases, the split is clear. For a compact desktop or media center build where a discrete GPU is not desired, the AMD A10-7700K is the only option of the two, as its Radeon R7 graphics are built in. For a legacy Socket 775 platform upgrade where the user already has a discrete GPU and wants maximum L2 cache for cache-sensitive workloads, the QX9770 could be considered, but the data does not show it beating the AMD part in any aggregate metric. The QX9770's Cinebench scores, while internally impressive in scaling, are not directly comparable to the A10-7700K's Geekbench scores, so no cross-application conclusion can be drawn. The database records zero wins for each CPU in head-to-head tests, which reinforces the absence of a direct competitive benchmark. Ultimately, the A10-7700K is the better-rounded processor according to the recorded data, while the QX9770 retains niche strengths in cache size and multicore scaling within its own test suite.