Athlon 64 2700+ vs Core 2 Quad Q6600
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Athlon 64 2700+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
Place in performance ranking | 2318 | not rated |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
Series | Core 2 Quad (Desktop) | no data |
Architecture codename | Kentsfield (2007) | NewCastle (2004) |
Release date | no data | April 2004 (20 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Athlon 64 2700+ 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
Threads | 4 | 1 |
Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
Bus rate | 1066 MHz | no data |
L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
L2 cache | no data | 512 KB |
L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
Die size | no data | 144 mm2 |
Number of transistors | no data | 69 million |
64 bit support | + | - |
Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Athlon 64 2700+ 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 | 754 |
Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 32 Watt |
Pros & cons summary
Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
Threads | 4 | 1 |
Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 32 Watt |
Core 2 Quad Q6600 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Athlon 64 2700+, on the other hand, has 228.1% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Athlon 64 2700+. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Core 2 Quad Q6600 is a desktop processor while Athlon 64 2700+ is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Athlon 64 2700+, 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.