Core 2 Duo T5470 vs Core 2 Quad Q6600
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Core 2 Duo T5470 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2375 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Core 2 Quad (Desktop) | Core 2 Duo |
| Power efficiency | 1.04 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Kentsfield (2007) | Merom-2048 (2006−2008) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Core 2 Duo T5470 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 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1066 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L3 cache | no data | 2 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.075V-1.25V |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Core 2 Duo T5470 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.
| Socket | no data | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Core 2 Duo T5470. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Core 2 Duo T5470 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Core 2 Duo T5470 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | - |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 35 Watt |
Core 2 Quad Q6600 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Core 2 Duo T5470, on the other hand, has 200% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Core 2 Duo T5470. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Core 2 Quad Q6600 is a desktop processor while Core 2 Duo T5470 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Core 2 Duo T5470, 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.
