Core Ultra 7 258V vs Core 2 Extreme QX6850

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Extreme QX6850
2007
4 cores / 4 threads, 130 Watt
1.44
Core Ultra 7 258V
2024
8 cores / 8 threads, 17 Watt
12.47
+766%

Core Ultra 7 258V outperforms Core 2 Extreme QX6850 by a whopping 766% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2189625
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesCore 2 Extreme (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency1.0569.42
Architecture codenameKentsfield (2007)Lunar Lake (2024)
Release dateno data24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Performance-coresno data4
Low Power Efficient-coresno data4
Threads48
Base clock speedno data2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz4.8 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHz37 MHz
L1 cache64K (per core)192 KB (per core)
L2 cache8 MB (shared)2.5 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm3 nm
Die size2x 143 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)64 °Cno data
Number of transistors582 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V 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
Socket775FCBGA2833
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
TSX-+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+
Supported AI Software Frameworks-OpenVINO™, WindowsML, DirectML, ONNX RT, WebNN

Security technologies

Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR5
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel Arc Graphics 140V
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.95 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2304 @ 60Hz (HDMI 2.1 TMDS) 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz (HDMI2.1 FRL)
Max resolution over eDPno data3840x2400 @ 120Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12.2
OpenGLno data4.6

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Extreme (Desktop) QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
PCI supportno data5.0 and 4.0

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 1.44
Ultra 7 258V 12.47
+766%

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 QX6850 2292
Ultra 7 258V 19813
+764%

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 Extreme QX6850 3095
Ultra 7 258V 9982
+223%

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 Extreme QX6850 10990
Ultra 7 258V 36479
+232%

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 Extreme QX6850 4450
Ultra 7 258V 10693
+140%

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 Extreme QX6850 3
Ultra 7 258V 20
+480%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.44 12.47
Physical cores 4 8
Threads 4 8
Chip lithography 65 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 17 Watt

Ultra 7 258V has a 766% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 2066.7% more advanced lithography process, and 664.7% lower power consumption.

The Core Ultra 7 258V is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Extreme QX6850 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Extreme QX6850 is a desktop processor while Core Ultra 7 258V is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and Core Ultra 7 258V, 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 QX6850
Core 2 Extreme QX6850
Intel Core Ultra 7 258V
Core Ultra 7 258V

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.


3.4 52 votes

Rate Core 2 Extreme QX6850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 14 votes

Rate Core Ultra 7 258V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Extreme QX6850 or Core Ultra 7 258V, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.