AMD PRO A10-8750B vs Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 Comparison

The AMD PRO A10-8750B and the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 represent two distinct eras of desktop computing, separated by over seven years of architectural evolution. The data shows both processors are quad-core, quad-thread parts that land at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs, indicating they are firmly in legacy territory. However, the benchmark results reveal a consistent, if modest, performance advantage for the AMD part across all tested workloads, with the Intel chip countering with a higher launch MSRP and a fully unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock speed?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B has a base clock of 3.60 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775's base clock of 3.20 GHz. The AMD part also features a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, while the Intel chip has no listed boost clock.

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

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B wins all multi-core benchmarks. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2525 against the Intel's 2363, a 6.9% advantage. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R15 (254 vs 238) and R20 (1060 vs 992), showing a consistent lead.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 supports ECC memory, while the AMD PRO A10-8750B does not. This is a notable feature difference, though the Intel chip's memory support is listed as DDR2, dependent on the motherboard.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B has an average benchmark score of 821, which is slightly higher than the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775's average score of 813. This places the AMD part 1.0% ahead of its rival in overall performance.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No, both the AMD PRO A10-8750B and the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 are listed as end-of-life products. The AMD chip was released in 2015, while the Intel chip dates back to 2008.

Q: What are the architecture and manufacturing process differences?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B uses the Steamroller architecture (Godaveri codename) on a 28 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 uses the older Core 2 architecture (Yorkfield codename) on a 45 nm process from Intel, making the AMD chip significantly more modern in this regard.

Where Each One Wins

The performance landscape is one-sided in the benchmark data. The AMD PRO A10-8750B wins all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons, taking every single-core and multi-core test in the Cinebench suite. Its largest win is in Cinebench R20 single-core, where it leads by 7.2%, scoring 149 against the Intel's 139. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the AMD part still wins by 6.7% with a score of 254 versus 238.

The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 does not win any benchmark test, but it holds advantages in other areas. The data shows it has ECC memory support, which the AMD chip lacks, and it features an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, whereas the AMD PRO A10-8750B is locked. The Intel chip also has a higher launch MSRP of $1499, indicating a different market positioning at its release, though the AMD part's launch MSRP is not listed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The AMD PRO A10-8750B is built on the Steamroller architecture with the Godaveri codename, manufactured on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 2,411 million transistors into a 245 mm² die. The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 uses the much older Core 2 architecture with the Yorkfield codename, built on a 45 nm process at Intel. This chip has only 820 million transistors spread across two dies, each measuring 107 mm².

Cache configurations also differ significantly. The AMD part has a 256 KB L1 cache and a 4 MB L2 cache. The Intel chip has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 6 MB of L2 cache per die. Neither processor has an L3 cache. The AMD chip also integrates a Radeon R7 graphics unit, while the Intel processor has no integrated graphics. Memory support differs as well: the AMD PRO A10-8750B uses DDR3 with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, while the Intel chip uses DDR2, with the specific memory bus and bandwidth listed as dependent on the motherboard.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specifications. The AMD PRO A10-8750B has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 has a lower base clock of 3.20 GHz and no boost clock. The TDP also differs dramatically: the AMD chip draws 95 watts, while the Intel chip draws 150 watts.

The sockets are incompatible, with the AMD part using AMD Socket FM2+ and the Intel part using Intel Socket 771. The AMD processor supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel chip only supports PCIe Gen 1. The AMD part does not support ECC memory, while the Intel part does. The Intel processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the AMD processor does not. The Intel chip also has a listed launch MSRP of $1499, while no launch MSRP is available for the AMD part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data provides a clear picture of performance differences. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD PRO A10-8750B scores 254, beating the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775's 238 by 6.7%. This advantage widens slightly in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the AMD chip scores 1060 versus 992, a 6.9% lead. The difference is most pronounced in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the AMD part's 149 score edges out the Intel's 139 by 7.2%.

The pattern holds in the more demanding Cinebench R23 tests. In multi-core, the AMD PRO A10-8750B scores 2525 against the Intel's 2363, another 6.9% margin. In single-core, the AMD chip scores 356 versus 333, also a 6.9% advantage. Across all five tests, the AMD processor wins by margins ranging from 6.7% to 7.2%, demonstrating a consistent, if not overwhelming, performance superiority.

Additional context comes from the nearest rivals data. The AMD PRO A10-8750B's average score of 821 places it just 0.1% ahead of the Intel Xeon E5540 (820) and 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core i5-L16G7 (816). The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775's average score of 813 puts it in a similar class, sitting 0.2% behind the Intel Xeon X3440 (815) and 0.4% behind the Intel Core i5-L16G7 (816). Both chips are clearly in the same performance tier, but the AMD part holds a slight edge in every direct comparison.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for most users: the AMD PRO A10-8750B is the better performer. It wins every benchmark test by a consistent margin, offers a higher base clock, a boost clock, a more modern architecture, and a significantly lower TDP of 95 watts compared to the Intel's 150 watts. For anyone prioritizing raw computational performance, lower power consumption, or integrated graphics, the AMD part is the clear choice based on the benchmark results.

The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775, however, retains appeal for specific use cases. Its support for ECC memory makes it a candidate for systems requiring error-correcting memory, a feature the AMD chip lacks. Its unlocked multiplier also offers overclocking flexibility, which could appeal to enthusiasts willing to accept higher power draw and an older platform. The Intel chip's higher launch MSRP of $1499 also indicates it was originally positioned as a premium part, though this historical context does not change its current performance standing.

In summary, the AMD PRO A10-8750B wins on performance across the board, while the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 offers niche features like ECC support and overclocking. For general desktop workloads where benchmark scores matter, the AMD chip is the stronger option. For specialized memory requirements or overclocking projects, the Intel chip has unique characteristics worth considering. The 22nd percentile ranking for both parts confirms they are outdated by modern standards, but within their class, the AMD PRO A10-8750B is the data-backed winner.