Xeon Gold 6248R vs Core 2 Duo E6600
Aggregate performance score
Xeon Gold 6248R outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by a whopping 3866% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Duo E6600 and Xeon Gold 6248R processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2698 | 198 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.46 | 10.02 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | Core 2 Duo (Desktop) | Intel Xeon Gold |
| Architecture codename | Conroe (2006−2007) | Cascade Lake (2019−2020) |
| Release date | no data | 24 February 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $2,700 |
| Current price | $9.99 | $3465 (1.3x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon Gold 6248R has 190% better value for money than Core 2 Duo E6600.
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Duo E6600 and Xeon Gold 6248R 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) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 4 GHz |
| Bus support | 1066 MHz | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| L1 cache | no data | 1.5 MB |
| L2 cache | no data | 24 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 35.75 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 75 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Duo E6600 and Xeon Gold 6248R 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.
| Socket | no data | FCLGA3647 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 205 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo E6600 and Xeon Gold 6248R. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Launched |
Security technologies
Core 2 Duo E6600 and Xeon Gold 6248R technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo E6600 and Xeon Gold 6248R are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo E6600 and Xeon Gold 6248R. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-2933 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 1 TB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 6 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 140.8 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Duo E6600 and Xeon Gold 6248R.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 48 |
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.
Xeon Gold 6248R outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by 3866% 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%
Xeon Gold 6248R outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by 3838% 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%
Xeon Gold 6248R outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by 382% 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%
Xeon Gold 6248R outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by 2385% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.59 | 23.40 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 24 |
| Threads | 2 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 205 Watt |
The Xeon Gold 6248R 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 Xeon Gold 6248R is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E6600 and Xeon Gold 6248R, 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.
