Core Ultra 7 265K vs Core 2 Extreme QX6700

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Extreme QX6700
4 cores / 4 threads, 130 Watt
1.38
Core Ultra 7 265K
2024
20 cores / 20 threads, 125 Watt
39.30
+2748%

Core Ultra 7 265K outperforms Core 2 Extreme QX6700 by a whopping 2748% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6700 and Core Ultra 7 265K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking223980
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data97.01
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesCore 2 Extreme (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency0.9728.67
Architecture codenameKentsfield (2007)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)24 October 2024 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$394

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6700 and Core Ultra 7 265K 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)20 (Icosa-Core)
Threads420
Base clock speedno data3.9 GHz
Boost clock speed2.67 GHz5.5 GHz
Bus rate1066 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data112 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data3 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm3 nm
Die sizeno data243 mm2
Number of transistorsno data17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6700 and Core Ultra 7 265K 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
Socketno data1851
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6700 and Core Ultra 7 265K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+
SIPP-+

Security technologies

Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6700 and Core Ultra 7 265K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6700 and Core Ultra 7 265K are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6700 and Core Ultra 7 265K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5 Depends on motherboard

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataArc Xe2 Graphics 64EU

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6700 and Core Ultra 7 265K.

PCIe versionno data5.0
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 Extreme QX6700 1.38
Ultra 7 265K 39.30
+2748%

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 Extreme QX6700 2118
Ultra 7 265K 60140
+2739%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.38 39.30
Physical cores 4 20
Threads 4 20
Chip lithography 65 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 125 Watt

Ultra 7 265K has a 2747.8% higher aggregate performance score, 400% more physical cores and 400% more threads, a 2066.7% more advanced lithography process, and 4% lower power consumption.

The Core Ultra 7 265K is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Extreme QX6700 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Extreme QX6700 and Core Ultra 7 265K, 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 Extreme QX6700
Core 2 Extreme QX6700
Intel Core Ultra 7 265K
Core Ultra 7 265K

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.


4.3 45 votes

Rate Core 2 Extreme QX6700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 23 votes

Rate Core Ultra 7 265K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Extreme QX6700 or Core Ultra 7 265K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.