CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 2600 vs 4670 among desktop CPUs (over 75W)

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Fire Strike

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

9

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i5 4670 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i5 4670  based on its single-core performance, power consumption and value.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS
Front view of Intel Core i5 4670

Intel Core i5 4670

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i7 2600

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 2600

Report a correction
Much better turbo clock speed 1,350 MHz vs 1,200 MHz Around 15% better turbo clock speed
Much higher GPU clock speed 850 MHz vs 350 MHz Around 2.5x higher GPU clock speed
More l3 cache 8 MB vs 6 MB Around 35% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.01 GHz vs 3.77 GHz More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More l3 cache per core 2 MB/core vs 1.5 MB/core Around 35% more l3 cache per core
Front view of Intel Core i5 4670

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 4670

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much lower typical power consumption 68.25W vs 114.5W More than 40% lower typical power consumption
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
Much better PCMark 8 home 3.0 accelerated score 3,071 vs 2,607 Around 20% better PCMark 8 home 3.0 accelerated score
Much better CompuBench 1.5 ocean surface simulation score 228.39 fps vs 75.8 fps More than 3x better CompuBench 1.5 ocean surface simulation score
Much better performance per watt 10.99 pt/W vs 6.04 pt/W More than 80% better performance per watt
Newer Apr, 2013 vs Jan, 2011 Release date over 2 years later
Better geekbench 3 single core score 3,433 vs 2,876 Around 20% better geekbench 3 single core score
Significantly better performance per dollar 5.25 pt/$ vs 0.75 pt/$ Around 7x better performance per dollar
Much lower annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year vs 41.87 $/year 2.1x lower annual home energy cost
Better PassMark (Overclocked) score 4,305.9 vs 2,824.9 More than 50% better PassMark (Overclocked) score
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year vs 112.13 $/year Around 35% lower annual commercial energy cost
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.76 GHz vs 3.5 GHz More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i7 2600 vs i5 4670

CompuBench 1.5 (Ocean surface simulation) Data courtesy CompuBench

Core i7 2600
75.8 fps
Core i5 4670
228.39 fps

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated Data courtesy FutureMark

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i7 2600
10,986
Core i5 4670
10,910

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i7 2600
2,470,000 MB/s
Core i5 4670
4,760,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i7 2600
11,071
Core i5 4670
10,509

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i7 2600
11,820
Core i5 4670
11,963

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i7 2600  vs
i5 4670 
Clock speed 3.4 GHz 3.4 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.8 GHz 3.8 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Is unlocked No No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 95W 84W
Annual home energy cost 41.87 $/year 20.24 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 112.13 $/year 73.58 $/year
Performance per watt 6.04 pt/W 10.99 pt/W
Typical power consumption 114.5W 68.25W

bus

Architecture DMI DMI 2.0
Number of links 1 0
Transfer rate 5,000 MT/s 5,000 MT/s

details

Core i7 2600  vs
i5 4670 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 8 4
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
L3 cache 8 MB 6 MB
L3 cache per core 2 MB/core 1.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 72.6°C Unknown - 72.72°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.01 GHz 3.77 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.5 GHz 3.76 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 2,824.9 4,305.9
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.01 GHz 3.77 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics 2000 Intel® HD Graphics 4600
Number of displays supported 2 3
GPU clock speed 850 MHz 350 MHz
Turbo clock speed 1,350 MHz 1,200 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3L-1333
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 21,333.32 MB/s 25,600 MB/s
Maximum memory size 32,768 MB 32,768 MB
Intel Core i7 2600
Report a correction
Intel Core i5 4670
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus