AMD A6-9400 vs Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 Comparison

The AMD A6-9400 and the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 are separated by over a decade of silicon evolution, yet their benchmark scores land within a single percentage point of each other. The AMD part, a 2-core/2-thread Excavator chip on 28nm, edges out the 4-core/4-thread Yorkfield XE in every single Cinebench test, but the margins are razor-thin. The data shows a statistical dead heat in raw compute, with the real story lying in the architectural gulf between the two platforms.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD A6-9400 takes all five head-to-head Cinebench victories. In multi-core workloads, the A6-9400 wins by 0.4% in Cinebench R15 (232 vs 231) and 0.6% in both R20 (969 vs 963) and R23 (2309 vs 2295). The single-core tests show the same pattern, with the A6-9400 ahead by 0.6% in R23 (326 vs 324) and tying at 136 in R20. These deltas are within run-to-run variance, meaning neither chip enjoys a meaningful performance advantage in synthetic rendering.

The QX9770’s only saving grace is its four physical cores versus the A6-9400’s two. However, that core-count advantage fails to translate into a single benchmark win. The older Intel architecture’s lower per-core efficiency nullifies its extra execution resources in these tests. For a user choosing between them today, the A6-9400 wins on every measurable criterion in the pack, but the victory is so narrow that real-world differences would be imperceptible. The QX9770’s unlocked multiplier is its sole distinct advantage, offering overclocking headroom that the locked A6-9400 cannot match.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent opposite ends of their respective design philosophies. The A6-9400 uses AMD’s Excavator architecture on a 28nm GlobalFoundries process, packing 3,100 million transistors into a 250 mm² die. The QX9770 uses Intel’s Core 2 architecture on a 45nm process, with 820 million transistors spread across a dual-die design of 2x 107 mm². The transistor count disparity is striking: AMD crams nearly four times as many transistors into a slightly larger total area, reflecting the integrated Radeon R5 graphics on the A6-9400 versus the QX9770’s reliance on chipset-based graphics.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. The A6-9400 carries 160 KB of L1 and a modest 1 MB of shared L2, with no L3. The QX9770 offers 64 KB of L1 per core and a substantial 12 MB of shared L2, also without L3. Despite having twelve times more L2 cache, the Intel chip still loses every benchmark, indicating that its older Core 2 microarchitecture cannot extract the same performance per clock from that cache as Excavator can from its smaller pool.

Memory support differs completely: the A6-9400 runs DDR4 through a dual-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth, while the QX9770 supports DDR1, DDR2, and DDR3 through dual-channel memory with no bandwidth figure listed. The AMD chip also uses PCIe Gen 3 with 8 CPU lanes, whereas the Intel part is limited to PCIe Gen 2. Power envelopes are worlds apart: the A6-9400 draws 65W TDP against the QX9770’s 136W, making the modern chip more than twice as efficient per watt.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the A6-9400 comes in Cinebench R20 and R23 multi-core, where it leads by 0.6% (969 vs 963 and 2309 vs 2295 respectively). The R15 multi-core test shows a 0.4% lead (232 vs 231). Single-core results are even closer: R20 single-core is a dead tie at 136, while R23 single-core gives the A6-9400 a 0.6% edge (326 vs 324). No test produces a delta beyond 0.6%, which is effectively noise in synthetic benchmarking.

These results are remarkable given the hardware disparity. The QX9770 has twice the cores and twelve times the L2 cache, yet cannot overcome the A6-9400’s superior IPC and newer memory subsystem. The average benchmark scores tell the same tale: the A6-9400 sits at 794 average with a 21st percentile ranking, while the QX9770 scores 790 average, also at the 21st percentile. The nearest rivals list confirms the tight cluster: the A6-9400 is 0.5% ahead of the QX9770, which itself is 0.1% behind the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 and the AMD Opteron 3350 HE.

The practical interpretation is that both processors occupy the same performance tier despite their generational gap. A workload that saturates the QX9770’s four threads might see a slight edge in real-world multi-threaded apps, but Cinebench’s scaling pattern shows the A6-9400 holding its own. For single-threaded tasks, the AMD chip’s higher base clock of 3.40 GHz (boostable to 3.70 GHz) versus the QX9770’s fixed 3.20 GHz gives it a theoretical frequency advantage that the benchmark results confirm.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD A6-9400 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. It leads by 0.4% in R15 (232 vs 231) and by 0.6% in both R20 (969 vs 963) and R23 (2309 vs 2295).

Q: How do the two chips compare in single-core performance?

A: The A6-9400 edges ahead in R23 single-core by 0.6% (326 vs 324) and ties the QX9770 exactly at 136 in R20 single-core.

Q: Does the QX9770’s four-core design give it an advantage?

A: Despite having twice the cores, the QX9770 loses every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. Its 4-core/4-thread configuration cannot overcome the A6-9400’s superior per-core efficiency.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The AMD A6-9400 has a 65W TDP, while the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 draws 136W. The AMD chip achieves comparable performance at less than half the power envelope.

Q: Which processor supports newer memory technology?

A: The A6-9400 supports DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the QX9770 supports DDR1, DDR2, and DDR3 with no bandwidth figure listed. The AMD chip also uses PCIe Gen 3 versus the Intel part’s PCIe Gen 2.

Q: Are these processors still in production?

A: The AMD A6-9400 is listed as Active, while the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 is End-of-life. The QX9770 also has an unlocked multiplier, which the A6-9400 lacks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD A6-9400 | Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 2 | 4 |

| Threads | 2 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.40 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.70 GHz | None |

| TDP | 65 W | 136 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel Socket 775 |

| Architecture | Excavator | Core 2 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 45 nm |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 820 million |

| Die Size | 250 mm² | 2x 107 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 160 KB | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | None listed |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 2 |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon R5 | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2019-03-15 | 2008-03-23 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | AD9400AGABBOX | SLAWM |