Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Ryzen 9 7940HX
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 9 7940HX outperforms Core 2 Quad Q6600 by a whopping 2885% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 9 7940HX and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 111 | 2384 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Dragon Range (Zen 4, Ryzen 7045) | Core 2 Quad (Desktop) |
| Power efficiency | 58.76 | 1.03 |
| Architecture codename | Dragon Range-HX (Zen 4) (2023−2024) | Kentsfield (2007) |
| Release date | 17 January 2024 (less than a year ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 9 7940HX and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) 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 | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 32 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 5.2 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 1066 MHz |
| L1 cache | 1 MB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 16 MB | 8 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 64 MB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | no data | 2x 143 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 71 °C |
| Number of transistors | 9900 Million | 582 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 9 7940HX and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | FL1 | 775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 105 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 7940HX and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 7940HX and Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon 610M (400 - 2200 MHz) | 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 34.33 | 1.15 |
| Recency | 17 January 2024 | no data |
| Physical cores | 16 | 4 |
| Threads | 32 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 105 Watt |
Ryzen 9 7940HX has a 2885.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2024 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, a 1200% more advanced lithography process, and 90.9% lower power consumption.
The Ryzen 9 7940HX is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q6600 in performance tests.
Be aware that Ryzen 9 7940HX is a notebook processor while Core 2 Quad Q6600 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 7940HX 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.
