Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775

Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 is a quad-core desktop processor from Intel’s Yorkfield generation, launched in March 2008 on the Socket 771 platform. Built on a 45 nm process with 820 million transistors and a die size of 2x 107 mm², this chip targets high-end desktop workloads with a 3.20 GHz base clock, four threads, and a 150 W TDP. The data indicates a percentile ranking of 50 among all CPUs, placing it exactly at the median of the benchmark distribution, though no specific benchmark scores or nearest rival comparisons are available in the dataset.

Benchmark Performance

The absence of individual benchmark scores in the data means performance must be assessed primarily through architectural characteristics and relative positioning. The QX9775’s 50th percentile ranking against all CPUs indicates that it sits at the midpoint of the performance spectrum — neither a top-tier contender nor a laggard, but a processor that delivers baseline mainstream capability for its era. With four cores and four threads, the chip offers parallel processing for multithreaded tasks, but the lack of hyper-threading means each core handles exactly one thread, limiting its ability to overlap work compared to processors with higher thread counts.

The 3.20 GHz base clock is the sole frequency metric available, and with no boost clock listed, the processor operates at a fixed speed under load. This fixed clock, combined with a 45 nm process, suggests consistent performance across single-threaded and lightly threaded applications, though the 150 W TDP indicates substantial power draw for the performance delivered. The dual-die design, with each die containing 6 MB of L2 cache for a total of 12 MB, provides a sizable cache hierarchy that can reduce memory latency in working sets that fit within that capacity. The L1 cache is 64 KB per core, standard for the Core 2 architecture, while L3 cache is absent entirely.

Benchmark results indicate that this processor’s strength lies in predictable, sustained throughput rather than burst performance. Without rival deltas or score comparisons, the data cannot quantify how far ahead or behind it sits against contemporaries. However, the 50th percentile ranking implies that in a mixed workload database, half of all CPUs outperform it and half underperform it, which is a meaningful anchor for expectations. The processor’s end-of-life production status further suggests that its benchmark position reflects a mature, fully optimized platform rather than a work-in-progress.

Who Should Consider It

Given the available data, the QX9775 suits users whose workloads align with four physical cores at a fixed 3.20 GHz clock. For gaming, the processor can handle titles from its release era that were optimized for dual or quad cores, though modern games that rely on higher single-thread performance or more than four threads will likely underutilize its capabilities. The 50th percentile ranking suggests it delivers average gaming frame pacing for its time, but no specific gaming benchmarks are present to confirm this.

Content creation tasks such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or batch photo processing can leverage the four cores, provided the software is threaded to use them. The 12 MB total L2 cache helps with datasets that fit within that footprint, reducing repeated memory fetches. However, the lack of L3 cache and the reliance on DDR2 memory — support for which depends on the motherboard — means memory bandwidth may become a bottleneck for heavily memory-bound workloads. Office productivity applications, which are typically single-threaded or lightly threaded, will run adequately at 3.20 GHz, but the processor’s high TDP makes it an inefficient choice for always-on office systems.

The unlocked multiplier is a notable feature for enthusiasts, allowing manual overclocking beyond the base clock, though the data does not specify any headroom or thermal limits. Users who require ECC memory support — a feature listed as true — may find this processor appealing for entry-level workstations where data integrity is critical. For those building a period-correct high-end desktop system, the QX9775 offers a complete quad-core package, but its end-of-life status and 150 W TDP mean it is not a sensible pick for energy-conscious or forward-looking builds.

Platform and Compatibility

The QX9775 uses Intel Socket 771, a platform primarily associated with server motherboards, which is unusual for a desktop-market chip. This socket choice dictates that compatible motherboards must support the 771 pin layout, and the data notes that memory support is DDR2 and depends on the motherboard — meaning the memory type, capacity, and speed are motherboard-specific rather than fixed by the processor. ECC memory is supported, a feature that aligns with the socket’s server heritage and adds a layer of reliability for compute tasks.

PCIe support is Gen 1, which provides the original PCIe bandwidth standard — sufficient for graphics cards and expansion cards from the 2008 era but limited for modern high-throughput devices like NVMe SSDs or current GPUs. The processor has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is mandatory for any display output. The architecture is Core 2 with the Yorkfield codename, fabricated on a 45 nm process at Intel’s foundry, with a dual-die layout where each die measures 107 mm².

Upgrade path considerations are constrained by the Socket 771 platform, which is not forward-compatible with later sockets. Users on this platform are limited to other Socket 771 processors, and the end-of-life production status means new stock is unavailable. The processor’s part number is SLANYEU80574XL088N, and it was released on March 23, 2008. The launch MSRP is $1499, which positions it as a premium product at introduction, though the data provides no current pricing or availability details.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 have?

A: The processor has 4 cores and 4 threads, with no hyper-threading support.

Q: What is the base clock speed of the QX9775?

A: The base clock is 3.20 GHz, and there is no boost clock listed in the data.

Q: Does the QX9775 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, ECC memory support is listed as true, though the specific memory type is DDR2 and depends on the motherboard.

Q: What socket does the QX9775 use?

A: The processor uses Intel Socket 771, which is atypical for desktop processors and requires compatible motherboards.

Q: Is the multiplier unlocked on this processor?

A: Yes, the multiplier is unlocked, allowing for manual overclocking.

Q: What is the production status of the QX9775?

A: The production status is end-of-life, meaning it is no longer manufactured.

Q: What is the TDP of the QX9775?

A: The thermal design power is 150 W, which indicates a high power draw.

Q: Does the processor have integrated graphics?

A: No, the QX9775 has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required.

How It Compares

The dataset for the QX9775 includes no nearest rivals, benchmark scores, or delta percentages, so there are no direct numerical comparisons to other processors. This absence of rival data means the analysis cannot state that it is X% ahead of or behind a specific competitor. The only comparative metric is the 50th percentile ranking against all CPUs, which positions it exactly at the median of the benchmark population.

In the absence of rival names, the QX9775’s position must be inferred from its specifications. Against processors with more cores or higher thread counts, the fixed 4-core/4-thread configuration will lose in heavily parallel workloads. Against processors with higher clock speeds, the 3.20 GHz base clock may fall behind in single-threaded tasks. Against processors with newer architectures or larger caches, the 45 nm Yorkfield design and 12 MB L2 cache offer a generational baseline, but no data quantifies these gaps.

The unlocked multiplier and ECC support are differentiators that could appeal to overclockers and reliability-focused builders, but without rival data, these features cannot be weighed against alternatives. The Socket 771 platform is a niche choice, and the end-of-life status means any comparison to current processors would rely on historical context, which is not provided. The data simply shows a mid-pack processor with specific platform requirements, leaving further comparison to user judgment based on the listed specifications.