Core 2 Quad Q6700 vs Phenom X4 9650

VS

Aggregate performance score

Phenom X4 9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.09
Core 2 Quad Q6700
2007
4 cores / 4 threads, 105 Watt
1.32
+21.1%

Core 2 Quad Q6700 outperforms Phenom X4 9650 by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Phenom X4 9650 and Core 2 Quad Q6700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24172268
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.091.31
Architecture codenameAgena (2007−2008)Kentsfield (2007)
Release dateMarch 2008 (16 years ago)April 2007 (17 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Phenom X4 9650 and Core 2 Quad Q6700 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speedno data2.66 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz2.67 GHz
Bus rateno data1066 MHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB (per core)8 MB (shared)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm65 nm
Die size285 mm22x 143 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data62 °C
Number of transistors450 million582 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.85V-1.5V

Compatibility

Information on Phenom X4 9650 and Core 2 Quad Q6700 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 configuration11
SocketAM2+LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Core 2 Quad Q6700. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Phenom X4 9650 and Core 2 Quad Q6700 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Core 2 Quad Q6700 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Core 2 Quad Q6700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR1, DDR2, DDR3

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.

Phenom X4 9650 1.09
Core 2 Quad Q6700 1.32
+21.1%

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.

Phenom X4 9650 1733
Core 2 Quad Q6700 2097
+21%

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.

Phenom X4 9650 238
Core 2 Quad Q6700 298
+25.2%

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.

Phenom X4 9650 758
Core 2 Quad Q6700 824
+8.7%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.09 1.32
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 105 Watt

Phenom X4 9650 has 10.5% lower power consumption.

Core 2 Quad Q6700, on the other hand, has a 21.1% higher aggregate performance score.

The Core 2 Quad Q6700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom X4 9650 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X4 9650 and Core 2 Quad Q6700, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Phenom X4 9650
Phenom X4 9650
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700
Core 2 Quad Q6700

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 226 votes

Rate Phenom X4 9650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 144 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q6700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Phenom X4 9650 or Core 2 Quad Q6700, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.