Intel Celeron G5920 vs Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent, though narrow, advantage for the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 across every Cinebench workload tested. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the QX9770 scores 231 against 226 for the Celeron G5920, a 2.2% lead. That margin is the largest single-core victory for the QX9770 as well, with a 2.3% advantage in Cinebench R20 singlecore, scoring 136 versus 133.

The pattern repeats across the newer Cinebench suites. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the QX9770 posts 963 points, while the Celeron G5920 manages 945, a 1.9% difference. Similarly, Cinebench R23 multicore shows the QX9770 at 2295 and the Celeron at 2252, again a 1.9% gap. The single-core results in Cinebench R23 mirror this exactly: 324 for the QX9770 and 318 for the Celeron, a 1.9% delta.

Notably, the QX9770 wins all five head-to-head comparisons, even though it is a much older design. The largest margin is just 2.3%, which indicates that these two processors are effectively in the same performance tier for the workloads measured. The Celeron G5920 never takes a win in any of the five tests, but its scores are close enough that the outcome is not a rout.

The average benchmark score reinforces the near tie. The QX9770 averages 790 points across its benchmark set, while the Celeron G5920 averages 775. That is a difference of roughly 2%, consistent with the head-to-head deltas. Both processors sit at the 21st percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they land in the same lower-mid range of overall performance.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each chip clarifies their standing. The QX9770's closest competitors include the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 and the AMD Opteron 3350 HE, both with an average score of 789, just 0.1% behind. The Intel Core i5-4210U and Intel Core i5-3610ME also sit nearby at 788, a 0.3% gap. For the Celeron G5920, the Intel Core i3-3250T matches its 775 average exactly, the Intel Pentium Silver J5005 is 0.1% higher at 776, the AMD Athlon X4 760K is 0.2% higher at 777, and the Intel Core i7-3687U trails by 0.3% at 773.

In practical terms, the data indicates that neither chip decisively outperforms the other in rendering workloads. The QX9770's 4 cores and 4 threads do give it a structural edge in multicore tests, and that edge shows up consistently, but the Celeron's higher base clock of 3.50 GHz against 3.20 GHz helps it stay competitive despite having only 2 cores and 2 threads. The single-core results are particularly telling: the QX9770 leads by only 2.3% in R20 singlecore and 1.9% in R23 singlecore, which is a modest gap for a processor released much later.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow verdict: the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, making it the stronger choice for pure Cinebench performance. Buyers or system builders who prioritize multicore rendering should lean toward the QX9770, as it holds a 1.9% to 2.2% advantage in all multicore tests. The single-core tests also favor the QX9770, with deltas ranging from 1.9% to 2.3%, so there is no workload category in the recorded data where the Celeron G5920 comes out ahead.

However, the margins are slim, and the Celeron G5920 is not far behind. If the use case involves other factors beyond Cinebench scores, the Celeron has its own advantages. It is an active production part, while the QX9770 is end-of-life. The Celeron uses a 14 nm process node versus 45 nm for the QX9770, which contributes to its much lower 58 W TDP compared to 136 W. The Celeron also supports DDR4 memory with a recorded memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, whereas the QX9770 supports DDR1, DDR2, and DDR3 with no bandwidth figure listed. The Celeron includes integrated UHD 610 graphics, while the QX9770 relies on a chipset feature that may provide graphics on certain motherboards.

For a user selecting between these two specifically for Cinebench workloads, the QX9770 is the winner in every measured test. For a user who needs an actively produced, lower-power processor with modern memory support and integrated graphics, the Celeron G5920 is the more practical choice, despite trailing by roughly 2% in the benchmark results. The percentile data shows both at the 21st percentile among all CPUs, so neither is a high-performance part by current standards; the choice depends on whether the slight benchmark edge or the platform-level features matter more.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from very different eras and microarchitectures. The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 is built on the Core 2 architecture with the codename Yorkfield, produced on a 45 nm process at Intel. It is part of the Core 2 Extreme generation, specifically the Yorkfield XE variant. The Intel Celeron G5920 uses the Comet Lake architecture, also by Intel, but on a much newer 14 nm process node.

The core counts differ substantially. The QX9770 has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Celeron G5920 has 2 cores and 2 threads. The QX9770 compensates for its older architecture with twice the core count, which is why it edges ahead in multicore tests despite the Celeron's higher clock speed.

Cache configurations also differ between the two. The QX9770 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and a shared 12 MB L2 cache, with no L3 cache listed. The Celeron G5920 also has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, but its L2 is 256 KB per core, and it adds a shared 2 MB L3 cache. The QX9770's large shared L2 is a hallmark of the Core 2 generation, while the Celeron relies on a smaller L2 plus an L3 tier.

The transistor count and die size are only recorded for the QX9770: 820 million transistors on a die size of 2x 107 mm². No such figures are listed for the Celeron G5920. The QX9770's socket is Intel Socket 775, while the Celeron G5920 uses Intel Socket 1200, which means they are not socket-compatible and cannot be swapped on the same motherboard.

Memory support is another major architectural split. The QX9770 supports DDR1, DDR2, and DDR3 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with no memory bandwidth figure recorded. The Celeron G5920 supports DDR4 memory, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The PCIe interface also differs: the QX9770 is listed as Gen 2, while the Celeron G5920 is Gen 3 with 16 lanes available from the CPU.

Integrated graphics are handled differently as well. The QX9770 lists integrated graphics as "On certain motherboards (Chipset feature)", meaning graphics depend on the motherboard chipset rather than the CPU itself. The Celeron G5920 includes UHD 610 integrated graphics directly.

The process node difference is significant: 45 nm for the QX9770 versus 14 nm for the Celeron G5920. That explains the TDP gap, as the QX9770 has a 136 W TDP while the Celeron G5920 is rated at 58 W. The QX9770 also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Celeron G5920 is locked.

Specification Differences

The specifications where the two processors differ are straightforward. The QX9770 has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Celeron G5920 has 2 cores and 2 threads. The base clock is 3.20 GHz for the QX9770 and 3.50 GHz for the Celeron G5920. Neither processor has a boost clock listed.

TDP differs sharply: 136 W for the QX9770 versus 58 W for the Celeron G5920. The sockets are different, Intel Socket 775 for the QX9770 and Intel Socket 1200 for the Celeron G5920. The process nodes are 45 nm and 14 nm respectively.

Cache amounts differ as noted: the QX9770 has 12 MB shared L2 and no L3, while the Celeron G5920 has 256 KB L2 per core and 2 MB shared L3. Memory support differs, with the QX9770 supporting DDR1, DDR2, and DDR3, and the Celeron supporting DDR4 only. The Celeron has a recorded memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while the QX9770 has none listed.

PCIe generation differs, Gen 2 for the QX9770 and Gen 3 with 16 lanes for the Celeron. Integrated graphics are a chipset feature for the QX9770, while the Celeron has UHD 610. The QX9770 has an unlocked multiplier; the Celeron is locked. The production status differs, end-of-life for the QX9770 and active for the Celeron. Release dates are also different, with the QX9770 released on 2008-03-23 and the Celeron on 2020-04-29. The part numbers are SLAWM for the QX9770 and SRH42 for the Celeron. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the Cinebench R23 multicore test?

A: The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 wins with a score of 2295 against 2252 for the Intel Celeron G5920, a 1.9% advantage.

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

A: The QX9770 leads in both recorded single-core tests. In Cinebench R20 singlecore, it scores 136 versus 133, a 2.3% lead. In Cinebench R23 singlecore, it scores 324 versus 318, a 1.9% lead.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The QX9770 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Celeron G5920 has 2 cores and 2 threads.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: The Intel Celeron G5920 supports DDR4 memory with a recorded memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The QX9770 supports DDR1, DDR2, and DDR3 memory.

Q: Are both processors at the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are at the 21st percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: Does the Celeron G5920 win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The QX9770 wins all five head-to-head Cinebench tests, with deltas ranging from 1.9% to 2.3%.