0 Comments
| Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 vs Duo E8400 |
Released January, 2007
Intel Core2 Quad Q6600
- 2.4 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Quad Q6600
![]() | More cores 4 | ![]() | More threads 4 |
VS
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Duo E8400
![]() | Much higher clock speed 3 GHz | ![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm |
![]() | Much lower typical power consumption 52.81W | ![]() | Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.22 GHz |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| |||||||
Much higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 2.4 GHz | More than 25% higher clock speed | |||
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 better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 GHz | vs | 3.52 GHz | More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Supports trusted computing | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing | |||
Much higher Maximum operating temperature | 72.4 °C | vs | 62.2 °C | More than 15% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
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 | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | vs | 3.6 GHz | Around 20% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Newer | Jan, 2008 | vs | Jan, 2007 | Release date a year later |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Quad Q6600 vs Duo E8400
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q6600
4,490
Core2 Duo E8400
2,982
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q6600
1,306
Core2 Duo E8400
1,625
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q6600
102,800 MB/s
Core2 Duo E8400
128,000 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q6600
4,161
Core2 Duo E8400
2,826
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q6600
4,541
Core2 Duo E8400
3,092
GeekBench
Core2 Quad Q6600
5,918
Core2 Duo E8400
4,794
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Core2 Quad Q6600
2,970
Core2 Duo E8400
2,160
PassMark (Single Core)
Core2 Quad Q6600
924
Core2 Duo E8400
1,251
Reviews Word on the street
Core2 Quad Q6600 | vs | Duo E8400 | ||
![]() | 9.4 | 9.1 |
---|
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Quad Q6600 | vs | Duo E8400 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3 GHz | |
Cores | Quad core | Dual core | |
Socket type | |||
LGA 775 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Supports trusted computing | No | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
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 |
details | Core2 Quad Q6600 | vs | Duo E8400 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 4 | 2 | |
L2 cache | 8 MB | 6 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 2 MB/core | 3 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 65 nm | 45 nm | |
Transistor count | 582,000,000 | 410,000,000 | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Clock multiplier | 9 | 9 | |
Voltage range | 0.85 - 1.5V | 0.85 - 1.36V | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 62.2°C | Unknown - 72.4°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclock popularity | 278 | 125 | |
Overclock review score | 5 | 4.5 | |
Overclocked clock speed | 3.52 GHz | 4.22 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.6 GHz | 4.23 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.52 GHz | 4.22 GHz | |
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 | 1.83 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 85.31W | 52.81W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
Clock speed | 1,066 MHz | 1,333 MHz |
Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 ![]() | Intel Core2 Duo E8400 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | ||
3220 vs Q6600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
Q8200 vs Q6600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
Q8400 vs Q6600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$184 | ||
3570K vs Q6600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$200 | ||
Q9400 vs Q6600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $179 | |
3220 vs E8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $179 | |
E7500 vs E8400 | ||
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 | ![]() |
$230 | $248 | |
9590 vs 4770K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $250 | |
6700K vs 6600K | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 1 comment.
ben (07:37 PM, May 25, 2014)