EPYC 7702P vs Core 2 Duo E6600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo E6600
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.59
EPYC 7702P
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 200 Watt
41.99
+7017%

EPYC 7702P outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by a whopping 7017% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo E6600 and EPYC 7702P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking269750
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.4619.91
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesCore 2 Duo (Desktop)AMD EPYC
Architecture codenameConroe (2006−2007)Zen 2 (2019−2020)
Release dateno data7 August 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,425
Current price$9.99 $1936 (0.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7702P has 475% better value for money than Core 2 Duo E6600.

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo E6600 and EPYC 7702P 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 cores2 (Dual-core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads2128
Base clock speedno data2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz3.35 GHz
Bus support1066 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data96K (per core)
L2 cacheno data512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die sizeno data192 mm2
Number of transistorsno data4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo E6600 and EPYC 7702P 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
Socketno dataTR4
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt200 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo E6600 and EPYC 7702P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NIno data+
AVXno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo E6600 and EPYC 7702P are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo E6600 and EPYC 7702P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Max memory channelsno data8
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s
ECC memory supportno 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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 0.59
EPYC 7702P 41.99
+7017%

EPYC 7702P outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by 7017% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Core 2 Duo E6600 919
EPYC 7702P 64943
+6967%

EPYC 7702P outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by 6967% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Core 2 Duo E6600 261
EPYC 7702P 888
+240%

EPYC 7702P outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by 240% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Core 2 Duo E6600 416
EPYC 7702P 15480
+3621%

EPYC 7702P outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by 3621% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.59 41.99
Physical cores 2 64
Threads 2 128
Chip lithography 65 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 200 Watt

The EPYC 7702P is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo E6600 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Duo E6600 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7702P is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E6600 and EPYC 7702P, 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.


Intel Core 2 Duo E6600
Core 2 Duo E6600
AMD EPYC 7702P
EPYC 7702P

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.


3.2 412 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 32 votes

Rate EPYC 7702P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Duo E6600 or EPYC 7702P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.