CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of Q6600 vs 640 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

2.1

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core2 Quad Q6600  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

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core2 Quad Q6600

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Quad Q6600

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 vs the AMD Athlon II X4 640.

Front view of AMD Athlon II X4 640

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon II X4 640

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the AMD Athlon II X4 640 vs the Intel Core2 Quad Q6600.

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Quad Q6600 vs Athlon II X4 640

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core2 Quad Q6600
102,800 MB/s
Athlon II X4 640
121,100 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Reviews Word on the street

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core2 Quad Q6600  vs
Athlon II X4 640 
Clock speed 2.4 GHz 3 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 775
AM3

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 105W 95W
Annual home energy cost 25.29 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 91.98 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 1.19 pt/W 1.54 pt/W
Typical power consumption 85.31W 77.19W

bus

Clock speed 1,066 MHz 2,000 MHz

details

Core2 Quad Q6600  vs
Athlon II X4 640 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 8 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 2 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.5V 1.05 - 1.4V
Operating temperature Unknown - 62.2°C Unknown - 71°C

overclocking

Overclock popularity 278 36
Overclock review score 5 4.5
Overclocked clock speed 3.52 GHz 3.57 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.6 GHz 3.89 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.52 GHz 3.57 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A
Intel Core2 Quad Q6600
Report a correction
AMD Athlon II X4 640
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

Showing 3 comments.
Looks like it has been updated now.
I have an X4 640 and a 620. I have had and used the 620 as my main desktop since release back in '09 and in the past couple of months switched to the 640. The difference is noticeable, in spite of the 620 having 6 MB of L3 that is real, verifiable and fully functioning (IIRC the initial release was someimtes capable of using onboard L3 as it wasn't fused). The 640 is quite a decent performer and although the lack of L3 can effect some things like gaming or video transcription, the overall performance is a nice boost. BTW the only reason I stopped using the 620 as main desktop is due to a peripheral board for USB 3.0 not working and the 'new' desktop has one built in and I was not willing to switch just the CPUs. I see the response by volkerball85 and agree the comparison here should be switched away from the posted result to reflect the actual results. All normal use metrics would point to the Athlon II X4 640, i.e. power consumption, performance, available motherboards, supported memory. The power used during overclocking would be substantially higher and due to the lower temperature ceiling for the Q6600 could well result in at least a throttled chip if not a failed one.
Once again, an AMD model outperforms an Intel model in every way except one that doesn't matter to most users (overclocking), yet Intel is given the "win?"
comments powered by Disqus