Athlon 64 X2 5200+ vs Core 2 Extreme QX6850
Aggregate performance score
Core 2 Extreme QX6850 outperforms Athlon 64 X2 5200+ by a whopping 169% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and Athlon 64 X2 5200+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2073 | 2736 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.69 | 3.54 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) | no data |
| Architecture codename | Kentsfield (2007) | Windsor (2006−2009) |
| Release date | no data | September 2006 (17 years ago) |
| Current price | $385 | $112 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Athlon 64 X2 5200+ has 32% better value for money than Core 2 Extreme QX6850.
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and Athlon 64 X2 5200+ 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Bus support | 1333 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 512K |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | no data | 220 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 154 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and Athlon 64 X2 5200+ 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 configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | no data | AM2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 89 Watt |
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 QX6850 outperforms Athlon 64 X2 5200+ by 169% 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 Extreme QX6850 outperforms Athlon 64 X2 5200+ by 172% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.48 | 0.55 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 89 Watt |
The Core 2 Extreme QX6850 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 X2 5200+ in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and Athlon 64 X2 5200+, 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.
