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
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 0.25 MB 32x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 4 vs 1 3 more cores; run more applications at once
More threads 4 vs 1 3 more threads
Much newer manufacturing process 65 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs x86 A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed
Much more l2 cache per core 2 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 8x more l2 cache per core
Has a NX bit Yes vs No Somewhat common; Prevents a common class of security exploits
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.52 GHz vs 3.35 GHz Around 5% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Newer Jan, 2007 vs Jun, 2004 Release date over 2 years later
Front view of Intel Celeron D 325

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron D 325

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 2.53 GHz vs 2.4 GHz More than 5% higher clock speed
Much lower typical power consumption 59.31W vs 85.31W More than 30% lower typical power consumption
Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature 67 °C vs 62.2 °C Around 10% higher Maximum operating temperature
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 63.95 $/year vs 91.98 $/year More than 30% lower annual commercial energy cost
Much lower annual home energy cost 17.59 $/year vs 25.29 $/year More than 30% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.99 GHz vs 3.6 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Features Key features of the Core2 Quad Q6600  vs Celeron D 325 

clock speed

Celeron D 325
2.53 GHz

L2 cache

overclocked clock speed (air)

Core2 Quad Q6600
3.52 GHz
Celeron D 325
3.35 GHz

overclocked clock speed (water)

Celeron D 325
3.99 GHz

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core2 Quad Q6600  vs
Celeron D 325 
Clock speed 2.4 GHz 2.53 GHz
Cores Quad core Single core
Socket type
LGA 775
478

features

Has a NX bit Yes No
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes No
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes No

power consumption

TDP 105W 73W
Annual home energy cost 25.29 $/year 17.59 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 91.98 $/year 63.95 $/year
Typical power consumption 85.31W 59.31W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Clock speed 1,066 MHz 533 MHz

details

Core2 Quad Q6600  vs
Celeron D 325 
Architecture x86-64 x86
Threads 4 1
L2 cache 8 MB 0.25 MB
L2 cache per core 2 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 90 nm
Transistor count 582,000,000 125,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 9 19
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.5V 1.25 - 1.4V
Operating temperature Unknown - 62.2°C Unknown - 67°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.52 GHz 3.35 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.6 GHz 3.99 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.52 GHz 3.35 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
Intel Celeron D 325
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus