Winner
AMD FX 4300
CPUBoss recommends the AMD FX 4300 based on its .
See full details| | Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 vs AMD FX 4300 |
| | Much more l2 cache 8 MB | | Much more l2 cache per core 2 MB/core |
by Tech Radar (Aug, 2007)In real terms, quad-threaded applications are thin on the ground and will be until at least this winter.
| | Newer manufacturing process 32 nms | | Much higher clock speed 3.8 GHz |
| | Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,420 | | Marginally newer Oct, 2012 |
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)At £70 this would have been tempting for the rig-builder on a tight budget - it happily outstrips the Ivy Bridge i3 in terms of multi-threaded goodness and can be pushed up to speeds that beat it in gaming terms too.
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| Core2 Quad Q6600 6.1 FX 4300 6.5 | |
| Cinebench R10 32-bit, Passmark and GeekBench (32-bit) | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| Core2 Quad Q6600 6.9 FX 4300 7.8 | |
| Cinebench R10 32-bit (1-core) and Passmark (Single Core) | |
Overclocking | |
How much speed can you get out of the processor? | |
| Core2 Quad Q6600 10.0 FX 4300 5.2 | |
| overclock popularity | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Core2 Quad Q6600 8.3 FX 4300 8.4 | |
| Performance Per Dollar | |
CPUBoss Score | |
Performance, Single-core Performance, Overclocking and Value | |
| Core2 Quad Q6600 6.7 FX 4300 7.1 | |
| | | AMD FX 4300CPUBoss Winner |
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 8 MB | vs | 4 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much more l2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | vs | 1 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core | |||
| |||||||
| Newer manufacturing process | 32 nms | vs | 65 nms | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Much higher clock speed | 3.8 GHz | vs | 2.4 GHz | Around 60% higher clock speed | |||
| Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,420 | vs | 921 | Around 55% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Marginally newer | Oct, 2012 | vs | Jan, 2007 | Release date over 5 years later | |||
| Better 3DMark11 physics score | 6,610 | vs | 2,910 | More than 2.2x better 3DMark11 physics score | |||
| Better PassMark score | 4,713 | vs | 2,987 | Around 60% better PassMark score | |||
| Slightly lower typical power consumption | 77.19W | vs | 85.31W | Around 10% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score | 4,114 | vs | 2,778 | Around 50% better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score | |||
| Slightly better geekbench (32-bit) score | 5,477 | vs | 4,181 | More than 30% better geekbench (32-bit) score | |||
| Better performance per watt | 6.6 pt/W | vs | 4.28 pt/W | Around 55% better performance per watt | |||
| Better cinebench r10 32Bit score | 12,857 | vs | 9,681 | Around 35% better cinebench r10 32Bit score | |||
| Slightly lower annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | vs | 91.98 $/year | Around 10% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Slightly lower annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | vs | 25.29 $/year | Around 10% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Core2 Quad Q6600 | vs | FX 4300 | ||
| 8.0 | 5.0 | Core2 Quad Q6600 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
summary | Core2 Quad Q6600 | vs | FX 4300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.8 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Quad core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 775 | |||
| AM3+ | |||
| Is hyperthreaded | No | No | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has vitualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction-set-extensions | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| AES | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
gpu | |||
| 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 | |
details | Core2 Quad Q6600 | vs | FX 4300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 4 | |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 4 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 65 nms | 32 nms | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclock popularity | 278 | 7 | |
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 | 4.28 pt/W | 6.6 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 85.31W | 77.19W | |
| Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 | AMD FX 4300 |
| VS | |
| $125 | $63 | |
| Intel Core i3 3220 vs Core2 Quad Q6600 | ||
| VS | |
| $230 | $63 | |
| Intel Core i5 3570K vs Core2 Quad Q6600 | ||
| VS | |
| $20 | $63 | |
| Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Quad Q6600 | ||
| VS | |
| $325 | $63 | |
| Intel Core i7 4770K vs Core2 Quad Q6600 | ||
| VS | |
| $110 | $85 | |
| AMD FX 6300 vs 4300 | ||
| VS | |
| $125 | $85 | |
| Intel Core i3 3220 vs AMD FX 4300 | ||
| VS | |
| $250 | $85 | |
| AMD Phenom II X4 965 vs FX 4300 | ||
| VS | |
| $249 | $325 | |
| AMD FX 9590 vs Intel Core i7 4770K | ||
| VS | |
| $161 | $225 | |
| Intel N3530 vs Core i3 3110M | ||
| VS | |
| $340 | $325 | |
| Intel 4790K vs Core i7 4770K | ||
| VS | |
| $225 | ||
| Intel Celeron N2830 vs Core i3 3217U | ||
| VS | |
| $97 | $281 | |
| AMD A8 6410 vs Intel Core i5 4200U | ||
| VS | |
| $378 | ||
| Intel Core i7 4700MQ vs AMD A10 5750M | ||
| VS | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 vs Samsung Exynos 5 Octa | ||