Athlon 64 FX-53 vs Core 2 Duo E6600
Aggregate performance score
Core 2 Duo E6600 outperforms Athlon 64 FX-53 by a considerable 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Athlon 64 FX-53 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2808 | 2984 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Core 2 Duo (Desktop) | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.84 | 0.44 |
| Architecture codename | Conroe (2006−2007) | Clawhammer (2001−2005) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | June 2004 (20 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $30 |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Athlon 64 FX-53 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1066 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | no data | 193 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 105 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Athlon 64 FX-53 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.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | no data | 939 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 89 Watt |
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 | 0.58 | 0.41 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 89 Watt |
Core 2 Duo E6600 has a 41.5% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 36.9% lower power consumption.
The Core 2 Duo E6600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 FX-53 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E6600 and Athlon 64 FX-53, 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.
