0 Comments
| Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 vs Duo E8500 |
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 E8500
- 3.16 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Duo E8500
![]() | Much higher clock speed 3.16 GHz | ![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm |
![]() | Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.46 GHz | ![]() | Much lower typical power consumption 52.81W |
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 | 3.16 GHz | vs | 2.4 GHz | More than 30% 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 better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.46 GHz | vs | 3.52 GHz | More than 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Much lower typical power consumption | 52.81W | vs | 85.31W | Around 40% lower typical power consumption | |||
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 better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.42 GHz | vs | 3.6 GHz | Around 25% 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 | Jan, 2008 | vs | Jan, 2007 | Release date a year later |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Quad Q6600 vs Duo E8500
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q6600
4,490
Core2 Duo E8500
3,230
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q6600
1,306
Core2 Duo E8500
1,773
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q6600
102,800 MB/s
Core2 Duo E8500
129,700 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q6600
4,161
Core2 Duo E8500
2,970
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Quad Q6600
4,541
Core2 Duo E8500
3,088
GeekBench
Core2 Quad Q6600
5,918
Core2 Duo E8500
5,261
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Core2 Quad Q6600
2,970
Core2 Duo E8500
2,291
PassMark (Single Core)
Core2 Quad Q6600
924
Core2 Duo E8500
1,318
Reviews Word on the street
Core2 Quad Q6600 | vs | Duo E8500 | ||
![]() | 8.0 | 8.0 |
---|
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Quad Q6600 | vs | Duo E8500 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.16 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 | |
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 | 1.93 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 |
details | Core2 Quad Q6600 | vs | Duo E8500 |
---|---|---|---|
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 | 33 | |
Overclocked clock speed | 3.52 GHz | 4.46 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.6 GHz | 4.42 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.52 GHz | 4.46 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 ![]() | Intel Core2 Duo E8500 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | ||
Q6600 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
Q6600 vs E8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
Q6600 vs Q8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
Q6600 vs Q8200 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$200 | ||
Q6600 vs Q9400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$184 | ||
Q6600 vs 3570K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$287 | ||
Q6600 vs Q9550 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
4005U vs N3540 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$248 | $230 | |
4770K vs 9590 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$250 | $350 | |
6600K vs 6700K | ||