Core 2 Duo E6600 vs A10-9620P

VS

Aggregate performance score

A10-9620P
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.60
+176%
Core 2 Duo E6600
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.58

A10-9620P outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by a whopping 176% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A10-9620P and Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20932808
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesBristol RidgeCore 2 Duo (Desktop)
Power efficiency10.090.84
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Conroe (2006−2007)
Release date1 January 2017 (7 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A10-9620P and Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed2.5 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus rateno data1066 MHz
L2 cache2 MBno data
Chip lithography28 nm65 nm
Die size250 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistors3100 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A10-9620P and Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

SocketFP4no data
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt65 Watt

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-9620P and Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A10-9620P 1.60
+176%
Core 2 Duo E6600 0.58

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

A10-9620P 2535
+176%
Core 2 Duo E6600 919

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

A10-9620P 503
+91.3%
Core 2 Duo E6600 263

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

A10-9620P 1115
+165%
Core 2 Duo E6600 420

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

A10-9620P 2277
Core 2 Duo E6600 2462
+8.1%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

A10-9620P 7420
+57.9%
Core 2 Duo E6600 4698

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

A10-9620P 14.41
+151%
Core 2 Duo E6600 36.2

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

A10-9620P 3
+97%
Core 2 Duo E6600 1

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

A10-9620P 230
+96.6%
Core 2 Duo E6600 117

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

A10-9620P 72
+16.1%
Core 2 Duo E6600 62

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

A10-9620P 16
+106%
Core 2 Duo E6600 8

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

A10-9620P 77
+79%
Core 2 Duo E6600 43

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

A10-9620P 1329
+13.3%
Core 2 Duo E6600 1173

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.60 0.58
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 65 Watt

A10-9620P has a 175.9% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The A10-9620P is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo E6600 in performance tests.

Be aware that A10-9620P is a notebook processor while Core 2 Duo E6600 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-9620P and Core 2 Duo E6600, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A10-9620P
A10-9620P
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600
Core 2 Duo E6600

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 313 votes

Rate A10-9620P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 432 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo E6600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-9620P or Core 2 Duo E6600, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.