Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Apple M3 Pro 11-Core
Aggregate performance score
Apple M3 Pro 11-Core outperforms Core 2 Quad Q6600 by a whopping 1262% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Apple M3 Pro 11-Core and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 426 | 2342 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Apple M3 | Core 2 Quad (Desktop) |
| Architecture codename | no data | Kentsfield (2007) |
| Release date | 30 October 2023 (less than a year ago) | no data |
Detailed specifications
Apple M3 Pro 11-Core and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 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 cores | 11 (Undeca-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 11 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.748 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.06 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 1066 MHz |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 65 nm |
| Number of transistors | 37000 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on Apple M3 Pro 11-Core and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 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.
| Power consumption (TDP) | 27 Watt | 105 Watt |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Apple M3 Pro 14-Core GPU | 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 16.07 | 1.18 |
| Physical cores | 11 | 4 |
| Threads | 11 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 27 Watt | 105 Watt |
Apple M3 Pro 11-Core has a 1261.9% higher aggregate performance score, 175% more physical cores and 175% more threads, a 2066.7% more advanced lithography process, and 288.9% lower power consumption.
The Apple M3 Pro 11-Core is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q6600 in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M3 Pro 11-Core is a notebook processor while Core 2 Quad Q6600 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Apple M3 Pro 11-Core and Core 2 Quad Q6600, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
