Xeon Platinum 8124 vs Core 2 Quad Q6600
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Xeon Platinum 8124 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2347 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | Core 2 Quad (Desktop) | Intel Xeon Platinum |
| Power efficiency | 1.03 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Kentsfield (2007) | Skylake (server) (2017−2019) |
| Release date | no data | no data |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Xeon Platinum 8124 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) | 18 (Octadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 36 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | 1066 MHz | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 30 |
| L1 cache | no data | 1.125 MB |
| L2 cache | no data | 18 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 24.75 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Xeon Platinum 8124 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 | 8 (Multiprocessor) |
| Socket | no data | Socket P |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 240 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Xeon Platinum 8124. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Xeon Platinum 8124 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Xeon Platinum 8124 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Xeon Platinum 8124. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-2666 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 768 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 6 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 128.001 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Xeon Platinum 8124.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 48 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 18 |
| Threads | 4 | 36 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 240 Watt |
Core 2 Quad Q6600 has 128.6% lower power consumption.
Xeon Platinum 8124, on the other hand, has 350% more physical cores and 800% more threads, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Xeon Platinum 8124. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Core 2 Quad Q6600 is a desktop processor while Xeon Platinum 8124 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Xeon Platinum 8124, 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.
