Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 vs Celeron E3300 |
Released January, 2007
Intel Core2 Quad Q6600
- 2.4 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Quad Q6600
 | Much more l2 cache 8 MB | | Much better PassMark score 2,970 |
| | More cores 4 | | More threads 4 |
VS
Released July, 2009
Intel Celeron E3300
- 2.5 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Celeron E3300
| | Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm | | Much lower typical power consumption 52.81W |
| | Much higher Maximum operating temperature 74.1 °C | | Higher clock speed 2.5 GHz |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 8 MB | vs | 1 MB | 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much better PassMark score | 2,970 | vs | 1,387 | Around 2.2x better PassMark score | |||
| More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 4x more l2 cache per core | |||
| |||||||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 45 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Much lower typical power consumption | 52.81W | vs | 85.31W | Around 40% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Much higher Maximum operating temperature | 74.1 °C | vs | 62.2 °C | Around 20% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
| Higher clock speed | 2.5 GHz | vs | 2.4 GHz | Around 5% higher clock speed | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.93 GHz | vs | 3.52 GHz | More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.61 GHz | vs | 3.6 GHz | Around 30% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | vs | 91.98 $/year | Around 40% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Much lower annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | vs | 25.29 $/year | Around 40% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Newer | Jul, 2009 | vs | Jan, 2007 | Release date over 2 years later | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Quad Q6600 vs Celeron E3300
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
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Quad Q6600 | vs | Celeron E3300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 2.5 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 775 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | No | No | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 105W | 65W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 25.29 $/year | 15.66 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 91.98 $/year | 56.94 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 1.19 pt/W | 1.58 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 85.31W | 52.81W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock speed | 1,066 MHz | 800 MHz | |
details | Core2 Quad Q6600 | vs | Celeron E3300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 1 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 65 nm | 45 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 9 | 12 | |
| Voltage range | 0.85 - 1.5V | 0.85 - 1.36V | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 62.2°C | Unknown - 74.1°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclock popularity | 278 | 3 | |
| Overclocked clock speed | 3.52 GHz | 3.93 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.6 GHz | 4.61 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.52 GHz | 3.93 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 E3300 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $125 | ||
| 3220 vs Q6600 | ||
 | VS | |
| $179 | ||
| E8400 vs Q6600 | ||
 | VS | |
| $179 | ||
| Q8400 vs Q6600 | ||
 | VS | |
| $200 | ||
| Q9400 vs Q6600 | ||
 | VS | |
| $179 | ||
| Q8200 vs Q6600 | ||
 | VS | |
| $287 | ||
| Q9550 vs Q6600 | ||
 | VS | |
| $184 | ||
| 3570K vs Q6600 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| 2500 vs W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| N3540 vs 4005U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $225 | $134 | |
| 3217U vs 847 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 5200 vs 3470 | ||
