Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Core Ultra 5 125H
Aggregate performance score
Ultra 5 125H outperforms Core 2 Quad Q6600 by a whopping 1150% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 460 | 2270 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 1.77 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Meteor Lake-H | Core 2 Quad (Desktop) |
| Architecture codename | Meteor Lake-H | Kentsfield (2007) |
| Release date | 14 December 2023 (less than a year ago) | no data |
| Current price | no data | $67 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600 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 | 14 (Tetradeca-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 18 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.5 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Bus support | no data | 1066 MHz |
| L3 cache | 18 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 65 nm |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600 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 | no data |
| Socket | FCBGA2049 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 105 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | no data |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| SIPP | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
| Status | Launched | no data |
Security technologies
Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 96 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| ECC memory support | - | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel® Arc™ graphics | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 2.2 GHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 4 | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096 x 2304 @ 60Hz (HDMI 2.1 TMDS) 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz (HDMI2.1 FRL) | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 3840x2400 @ 120Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12.2 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600.
| PCI Express lanes | 28 | no data |
| PCI support | 5.0 and 4.0 | 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 Ultra 5 125H outperforms Core 2 Quad Q6600 by 1150% based on our aggregate 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 Ultra 5 125H outperforms Core 2 Quad Q6600 by 1148% in Passmark.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
Core Ultra 5 125H outperforms Core 2 Quad Q6600 by 279% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Core Ultra 5 125H outperforms Core 2 Quad Q6600 by 451% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Core Ultra 5 125H outperforms Core 2 Quad Q6600 by 273% in 3DMark06 CPU.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 14.63 | 1.17 |
| Physical cores | 14 | 4 |
| Threads | 18 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 105 Watt |
The Core Ultra 5 125H is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q6600 in performance tests.
Be aware that Core Ultra 5 125H is a notebook processor while Core 2 Quad Q6600 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core Ultra 5 125H and Core 2 Quad Q6600, 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.
