Core 2 Quad Q6700 vs Core 2 Duo P7350

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo P7350
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 25 Watt
0.47
Core 2 Quad Q6700
2007
4 cores / 4 threads, 105 Watt
1.32
+181%

Core 2 Quad Q6700 outperforms Core 2 Duo P7350 by a whopping 181% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo P7350 and Core 2 Quad Q6700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking29102253
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Core 2 Duono data
Power efficiency1.781.31
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Kentsfield (2007)
Release date15 July 2008 (16 years ago)April 2007 (17 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo P7350 and Core 2 Quad Q6700 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2 GHz2.66 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz2.67 GHz
Bus rate1066 MHz1066 MHz
L1 cache128 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache3 MB8 MB (shared)
L3 cache3 MB L2 Cache0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm65 nm
Die size107 mm22x 143 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data62 °C
Number of transistors410 Million582 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1.062V-1.15V0.85V-1.5V

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo P7350 and Core 2 Quad Q6700 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
SocketBGA479,PGA478LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo P7350 and Core 2 Quad Q6700. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switching--
FSB parity--

Security technologies

Core 2 Duo P7350 and Core 2 Quad Q6700 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo P7350 and Core 2 Quad Q6700 are enumerated here.

VT-x-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo P7350 and Core 2 Quad Q6700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR1, DDR2, DDR3

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 P7350 0.47
Core 2 Quad Q6700 1.32
+181%

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 P7350 748
Core 2 Quad Q6700 2095
+180%

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 P7350 240
Core 2 Quad Q6700 298
+24.2%

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 P7350 397
Core 2 Quad Q6700 820
+107%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.47 1.32
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 45 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 105 Watt

Core 2 Duo P7350 has a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 320% lower power consumption.

Core 2 Quad Q6700, on the other hand, has a 180.9% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

The Core 2 Quad Q6700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo P7350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Core 2 Duo P7350 is a notebook processor while Core 2 Quad Q6700 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo P7350 and Core 2 Quad Q6700, 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 P7350
Core 2 Duo P7350
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700
Core 2 Quad Q6700

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 66 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo P7350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 135 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q6700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Duo P7350 or Core 2 Quad Q6700, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.