Phenom X4 9350e vs Core 2 Quad Q6600
Aggregated performance score
Core 2 Quad Q6600 outperforms Phenom X4 9350e by a moderate 17% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Phenom X4 9350e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2245 | 2345 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.77 | 1.67 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Core 2 Quad (Desktop) | no data |
| Architecture codename | Kentsfield (2007) | Agena (2007−2008) |
| Release date | no data | July 2008 (15 years ago) |
| Current price | $67 | $60 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Core 2 Quad Q6600 has 6% better value for money than Phenom X4 9350e.
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Phenom X4 9350e 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus support | 1066 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 2 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | no data | 285 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 450 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Phenom X4 9350e 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) | 105 Watt | 65 Watt |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Phenom X4 9350e are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | 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.
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 Quad Q6600 outperforms Phenom X4 9350e by 17% based on our aggregated 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 Quad Q6600 outperforms Phenom X4 9350e by 17% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.17 | 1.00 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 65 Watt |
The Core 2 Quad Q6600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom X4 9350e in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Phenom X4 9350e, 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.
