Ryzen 5 2600 vs Core 2 Duo E6600

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo E6600
2006
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.58
Ryzen 5 2600
2018
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
8.30
+1331%

Ryzen 5 2600 outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by a whopping 1331% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Ryzen 5 2600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2822916
Place by popularitynot in top-10021
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data10.18
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesCore 2 Duo (Desktop)AMD Ryzen 5
Power efficiency0.8412.02
Architecture codenameConroe (2006−2007)Pinnacle Riege (Zen+) (2018)
Release dateno data19 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Ryzen 5 2600 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)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads212
Base clock speedno data3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz3.9 GHz
Bus rate1066 MHz4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data34
L1 cache64 KB96K (per core)
L2 cache4 MB3 MB
L3 cache0 KB16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm12 nm
Die size143 mm2192 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Number of transistors291 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Ryzen 5 2600 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
Socket775AM4
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Ryzen 5 2600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Ryzen 5 2600 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Ryzen 5 2600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data46.933 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Ryzen 5 2600.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

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 0.58
Ryzen 5 2600 8.30
+1331%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 919
Ryzen 5 2600 13189
+1335%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 261
Ryzen 5 2600 1163
+346%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 421
Ryzen 5 2600 4899
+1064%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 2462
Ryzen 5 2600 4726
+92%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 4698
Ryzen 5 2600 28173
+500%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Core 2 Duo E6600 2052
Ryzen 5 2600 9290
+353%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 36.2
Ryzen 5 2600 5.5
+558%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 1
Ryzen 5 2600 14
+916%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Core 2 Duo E6600 117
Ryzen 5 2600 1248
+967%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 62
Ryzen 5 2600 157
+154%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Core 2 Duo E6600 0.2
Ryzen 5 2600 7.5
+4312%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 1173
Ryzen 5 2600 4517
+285%

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.  

Core 2 Duo E6600 8
Ryzen 5 2600 75
+847%

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.  

Core 2 Duo E6600 43
Ryzen 5 2600 205
+380%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.58 8.30
Physical cores 2 6
Threads 2 12
Chip lithography 65 nm 12 nm

Ryzen 5 2600 has a 1331% higher aggregate performance score, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 441.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 5 2600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo E6600 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E6600 and Ryzen 5 2600, 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 Ryzen 5 2600
Ryzen 5 2600

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.


3.2 438 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 15141 vote

Rate Ryzen 5 2600 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 Ryzen 5 2600, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.