CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 4770 vs 2600

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

Passmark

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Passmark (Single Core)

Overclocking

How much speed can you get out of the processor?

Passmark (Overclocked), Unlocked, Maximum Overclocked Clock Speed (Air) and 1 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Performance Per Dollar

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Overclocking and Value

Winner
Intel Core i7 4770 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i7 4770  based on its .

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

Intel Core i7 4770

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i7 4770

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i7 4770

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 4770

Report a correction
Newer manufacturing process 22 nms vs 32 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
Significantly lower typical power consumption 68.25W vs 114.5W More than 40% lower typical power consumption
Better performance per watt 14.59 pt/W vs 7.66 pt/W More than 90% better performance per watt
Better performance per dollar 3.99 pt/$ vs 2.28 pt/$ Around 75% better performance per dollar
Marginally newer Jun, 2013 vs Jan, 2011 Release date over 2 years later
Better PassMark score 9,523 vs 8,281 Around 15% better PassMark score
Much lower annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year vs 41.87 $/year 2.1x lower annual home energy cost
Better PassMark (Single core) score 2,029 vs 1,908 More than 5% better PassMark (Single core) score
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year vs 112.13 $/year Around 35% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of Intel Core i7 2600

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 2600

Report a correction
Much higher GPU clock speed 850 MHz vs 350 MHz Around 2.5x higher GPU clock speed
Better turbo clock speed 1,350 MHz vs 1,200 MHz Around 15% better turbo clock speed

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i7 4770 vs 2600

Passmark

Core i7 4770 Core i7 2600 @ cpubenchmark.net

Passmark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i7 4770  vs
2600 
Clock speed 3.4 GHz 3.4 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.9 GHz 3.8 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Is unlocked No No
Is hyperthreaded Yes Yes

features

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

gpu

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

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 21,333.32 MB/s
Maximum memory size 32,768 MB 32,768 MB

details

Core i7 4770  vs
2600 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 8 8
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
L3 cache 8 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 2 MB/core 2 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nms 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 72.72°C Unknown - 72.6°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.87 GHz 3.99 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.15 GHz 4.12 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 3,086.9 2,824.9
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.87 GHz 3.99 GHz

power consumption

TDP 84W 95W
Annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year 41.87 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year 112.13 $/year
Performance per watt 14.59 pt/W 7.66 pt/W
Typical power consumption 68.25W 114.5W

bus

Architecture DMI DMI
Number of links 0 1
Transfer rate 5,000 MT/s 5,000 MT/s
Intel Core i7 4770
Report a correction
Intel Core i7 2600
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus