EPYC 7742 vs Core 2 Quad Q6600
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7742 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q6600 by a whopping 3658% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2791 | 104 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 2.45 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | Core 2 Quad (Desktop) | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 0.43 | 7.47 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Kentsfield (2007) | Zen 2 (2019−2020) |
| Release date | no data | 7 August 2019 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $6,950 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and EPYC 7742: 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) | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 128 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.25 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1066 MHz | no data |
| Multiplier | no data | 22.5 |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Die size | 2x 143 mm2 | 192 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 71 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 582 million | 4,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and EPYC 7742 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 | 1 | 2 (Multiprocessor) |
| Socket | 775 | TR4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 225 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and EPYC 7742. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and EPYC 7742 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and EPYC 7742. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | DDR4 Eight-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.763 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.08 | 40.59 |
| Recency | no data | 7 August 2019 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 64 |
| Threads | 4 | 128 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 225 Watt |
Core 2 Quad Q6600 has 114% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7742, on the other hand, has a 3658% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2019 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 829% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 7742 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 in performance tests.
Note that Core 2 Quad Q6600 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7742 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
