1 | 2020 | AMD Ryzen 9 5950X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 9 5950X |
$ 710.0 | ||||
2 | 2021 | Intel Core i7-12700K
>> compare E6850 vs Core i7-12700K |
$ 470.0 | ||||
3 | 2021 | Intel Core i9-12900K
>> compare E6850 vs Core i9-12900K |
$ 590.0 | ||||
4 | 2022 | AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 7 5800X3D |
$ 450.0 | ||||
5 | 2021 | Intel Core i9-11900K
>> compare E6850 vs Core i9-11900K |
$ 488. 0 | ||||
6 | 2020 | AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 9 5900X |
$ 499.0 | ||||
7 | 2021 | Intel Core i5-12600K
>> compare E6850 vs Core i5-12600K |
$ 290.0 | ||||
8 | 2020 | AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 7 5800X |
$ 399.0 | ||||
9 | 2021 | Intel Core i7-11700K
>> compare E6850 vs Core i7-11700K |
$ 410.0 | ||||
10 | 2020 | AMD Ryzen 5 5600X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 5600X |
$ 299.0 | ||||
11 | 2020 | Intel Core i9-10900K
>> compare E6850 vs Core i9-10900K |
$ 590. 0 | ||||
12 | 2020 | Intel Core i7-10700K
>> compare E6850 vs Core i7-10700K |
$ 409.1 | ||||
13 | 2018 | Intel Core i9-9900K @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i9-9900K |
$ 835.0 | ||||
14 | 2021 | Intel Core i5-11600K
>> compare E6850 vs Core i5-11600K |
$ 262.0 | ||||
15 | 2018 | Intel Core i9-9900 @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i9-9900 |
$ 440.0 | ||||
16 | 2022 | Intel Core i5-12400
>> compare E6850 vs Core i5-12400 |
$ 143.0 | ||||
17 | 2018 | Intel Core i7-9700K @ 3. 60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-9700K |
$ 410.0 | ||||
18 | 2021 | Intel Core i5-11400
>> compare E6850 vs Core i5-11400 |
$ 182.0 | ||||
19 | 2018 | Intel Core i7-9700F @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-9700F |
$ 368.0 | ||||
20 | 2020 | Intel Core i5-10600K
>> compare E6850 vs Core i5-10600K |
$ 236.8 | ||||
21 | 2018 | Intel Core i7-8086K @ 4.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-8086K |
$ 553.0 | ||||
22 | 2018 | Intel Core i7-9700 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-9700 |
$ 330.0 | ||||
23 | 2017 | Intel Core i7-8700K @ 3. 70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-8700K |
$ 369.9 | ||||
24 | 2017 | Intel Core i9-7940X @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i9-7940X |
$ 1,192.1 | ||||
25 | 2020 | Intel Core i5-10400
>> compare E6850 vs Core i5-10400 |
$ 182.0 | ||||
26 | 2019 | AMD Ryzen 9 3950X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 9 3950X |
$ 750.0 | ||||
27 | 2019 | AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 9 3900X |
$ 499.0 | ||||
28 | 2019 | AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 7 3700X |
$ 330.0 | ||||
29 | 2019 | AMD Ryzen 7 3800X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 7 3800X |
$ 399. 0 | ||||
30 | 2019 | AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 3600X |
$ 249.0 | ||||
31 | 2018 | Intel Core i5-9600KF @ 3.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-9600KF |
$ 215.0 | ||||
32 | 2018 | Intel Core i5-9600K @ 3.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-9600K |
$ 280.0 | ||||
33 | 2019 | AMD Ryzen 5 3600
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 3600 |
$ 199.0 | ||||
34 | 2022 | AMD Ryzen 7 5700X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 7 5700X |
$ 300.0 | ||||
35 | 2022 | AMD Ryzen 5 5500
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 5500 |
$ 160. 0 | ||||
36 | 2022 | Intel Core i3-12300
>> compare E6850 vs Core i3-12300 |
$ 143.0 | ||||
37 | 2017 | Intel Core i5-8600K @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-8600K |
$ 377.7 | ||||
38 | 2017 | Intel Core i9-7900X @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i9-7900X |
$ 1,380.0 | ||||
39 | 2017 | Intel Core i9-7980XE @ 2.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i9-7980XE |
$ 2,005.5 | ||||
40 | 2019 | AMD Ryzen 5 3500X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 3500X |
$ 160.5 | ||||
41 | 2022 | Intel Core i3-12100
>> compare E6850 vs Core i3-12100 |
$ 122. 0 | ||||
42 | 2017 | Intel Core i7-8700 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-8700 |
$ 454.5 | ||||
43 | 2017 | Intel Core i9-7920X @ 2.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i9-7920X |
$ 1,096.7 | ||||
44 | 2017 | Intel Core i9-7960X @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i9-7960X |
$ 2,000.0 | ||||
45 | 2019 | Intel Core i5-9400F @ 2.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-9400F |
$ 170.0 | ||||
46 | 2019 | Intel Core i5-9400 @ 2.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-9400 |
$ 170.0 | ||||
47 | 2021 | Intel Core i3-11300
>> compare E6850 vs Core i3-11300 |
$ 143. 0 | ||||
48 | 2019 | AMD Ryzen 5 3500
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 3500 |
$ 148.0 | ||||
49 | 2018 | Intel Core i5-8600 @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-8600 |
$ 244.5 | ||||
50 | 2017 | Intel Core i7-7740X @ 4.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-7740X |
$ 349.0 | ||||
51 | 2020 | AMD Ryzen 3 3300X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 3 3300X |
$ 120.0 | ||||
52 | 2020 | AMD Ryzen 3 3100
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 3 3100 |
$ 90.0 | ||||
53 | 2021 | Intel Core i3-11100
>> compare E6850 vs Core i3-11100 |
$ 122. 0 | ||||
54 | 2020 | Intel Core i3-10300
>> compare E6850 vs Core i3-10300 |
$ 143.0 | ||||
55 | 2018 | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen Threadripper 2950X |
$ 900.0 | ||||
56 | 2018 | Intel Core i5-8500 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-8500 |
$ 239.0 | ||||
57 | 2016 | Intel Core i7-7700K @ 4.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-7700K |
$ 355.0 | ||||
58 | 2017 | Intel Core i7-7820X @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-7820X |
$ 930.0 | ||||
59 | 2014 | Intel Core i7-4790K @ 4. 00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-4790K |
$ 307.0 | ||||
60 | 2020 | Intel Core i3-10100
>> compare E6850 vs Core i3-10100 |
$ 122.0 | ||||
61 | 2018 | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX |
$ 1,720.0 | ||||
62 | 2017 | Intel Core i5-7640X @ 4.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-7640X |
$ 250.0 | ||||
63 | 2017 | Intel Core i5-8400 @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-8400 |
$ 200.0 | ||||
64 | 2019 | Intel Core i3-9350KF @ 4.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-9350KF |
$ 224. 0 | ||||
65 | 2019 | Intel Core i3-9320 @ 3.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-9320 |
$ 162.0 | ||||
66 | 2019 | Intel Core i3-9100 @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-9100 |
$ 170.0 | ||||
67 | 2017 | Intel Core i3-8350K @ 4.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-8350K |
$ 184.0 | ||||
68 | 2019 | Intel Core i3-9100F @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-9100F |
$ 105.0 | ||||
69 | 2017 | Intel Core i5-7600K @ 3.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-7600K |
$ 251.0 | ||||
70 | 2016 | Intel Core i7-6950X @ 3. 00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-6950X |
$ 1,576.0 | ||||
71 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X |
$ 680.0 | ||||
72 | 2015 | Intel Core i7-6700K @ 4.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-6700K |
$ 335.0 | ||||
73 | 2016 | Intel Core i7-6900K @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-6900K |
$ 1,200.0 | ||||
74 | 2017 | Intel Core i7-7800X @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-7800X |
$ 370.0 | ||||
75 | 2018 | AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 7 2700X |
$ 305. 0 | ||||
76 | 2018 | Intel Core i3-8300 @ 3.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-8300 |
$ 179.4 | ||||
77 | 2016 | Intel Core i7-7700 @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-7700 |
$ 325.1 | ||||
78 | 2017 | Intel Core i5-7600 @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-7600 |
$ 240.0 | ||||
79 | 2015 | Intel Core i7-6700 @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-6700 |
$ 433.7 | ||||
80 | 2016 | Intel Core i7-6800K @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-6800K |
$ 420.0 | ||||
81 | 2017 | Intel Core i3-8100 @ 3. 60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-8100 |
$ 130.0 | ||||
82 | 2013 | Intel Core i7-4770K @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-4770K |
$ 285.0 | ||||
83 | 2014 | Intel Core i7-4790 @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-4790 |
$ 279.0 | ||||
84 | 2015 | Intel Core i7-5775C @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-5775C |
$ 450.0 | ||||
85 | 2014 | Intel Core i7-5930K @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-5930K |
$ 499.0 | ||||
86 | 2016 | Intel Core i7-6850K @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-6850K |
$ 550. 0 | ||||
87 | 2018 | AMD Ryzen 5 2600X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 2600X |
$ 210.0 | ||||
88 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1920X |
$ 420.0 | ||||
89 | 2013 | Intel Core i7-4770 @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-4770 |
$ 240.0 | ||||
90 | 2013 | Intel Core i7-4771 @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-4771 |
$ 300.0 | ||||
91 | 2014 | Intel Core i7-4790S @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-4790S |
$ 342.6 | ||||
92 | 2018 | AMD Ryzen 7 2700
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 7 2700 |
$ 249. 2 | ||||
93 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1900X |
$ 350.0 | ||||
94 | 2013 | Intel Core i7-4770S @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-4770S |
$ 250.0 | ||||
95 | 2013 | Intel Core i7-4960X @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-4960X |
$ 770.0 | ||||
96 | 2014 | Intel Core i5-4690 @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4690 |
$ 200.0 | ||||
97 | 2014 | Intel Core i5-4690K @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4690K |
$ 200.0 | ||||
98 | 2014 | Intel Core i5-4690S @ 3. 20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4690S |
$ 269.9 | ||||
99 | 2015 | Intel Core i5-6600K @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-6600K |
$ 288.9 | ||||
100 | 2016 | Intel Core i5-7500 @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-7500 |
$ 210.0 | ||||
101 | 2014 | Intel Core i7-5820K @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-5820K |
$ 300.0 | ||||
102 | 2014 | Intel Core i7-5960X @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-5960X |
$ 770.0 | ||||
103 | 2018 | AMD Ryzen 5 2600
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 2600 |
$ 150.0 | ||||
104 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen 7 1800X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 7 1800X |
$ 250. 0 | ||||
105 | 2012 | Intel Core i7-3970X @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-3970X |
$ 954.0 | ||||
106 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen 5 1600X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 1600X |
$ 178.4 | ||||
107 | 2017 | Intel Core i3-7350K @ 4.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-7350K |
$ 230.0 | ||||
108 | 2013 | Intel Core i5-4670 @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4670 |
$ 188.0 | ||||
109 | 2013 | Intel Core i5-4670K @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4670K |
$ 250.0 | ||||
110 | 2018 | Intel Core i5-4670R @ 3. 00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4670R |
$ 276.0 | ||||
111 | 2015 | Intel Core i5-5675C @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-5675C |
$ 400.0 | ||||
112 | 2015 | Intel Core i5-6600 @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-6600 |
$ 220.0 | ||||
113 | 2012 | Intel Core i7-3770 @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-3770 |
$ 179.0 | ||||
114 | 2012 | Intel Core i7-3770K @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-3770K |
$ 249.0 | ||||
115 | 2011 | Intel Core i7-3960X @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-3960X |
$ 800. 0 | ||||
116 | 2013 | Intel Core i7-4930K @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-4930K |
$ 399.0 | ||||
117 | 2014 | Intel Core i5-4590 @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4590 |
$ 185.0 | ||||
118 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen 7 1700X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 7 1700X |
$ 200.0 | ||||
119 | 2017 | Intel Core i3-7320 @ 4.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-7320 |
$ 174.8 | ||||
120 | 2013 | Intel Core i5-4570 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4570 |
$ 175.0 | ||||
121 | 2014 | Intel Core i5-4590S @ 3. 00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4590S |
$ 198.0 | ||||
122 | 2017 | Intel Core i5-7400 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-7400 |
$ 213.5 | ||||
123 | 2011 | Intel Core i7-2700K @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-2700K |
$ 200.0 | ||||
124 | 2012 | Intel Core i7-3770S @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-3770S |
$ 200.0 | ||||
125 | 2011 | Intel Core i7-3930K @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-3930K |
$ 399.0 | ||||
126 | 2013 | Intel Core i7-4820K @ 3.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-4820K |
$ 500. 0 | ||||
127 | 2019 | AMD Ryzen 5 3400G
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 3400G |
$ 150.0 | ||||
128 | 2017 | Intel Core i3-7300 @ 4.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-7300 |
$ 210.0 | ||||
129 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen 5 1500X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 1500X |
$ 144.9 | ||||
130 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen 5 1600
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 1600 |
$ 155.0 | ||||
131 | 2018 | AMD Ryzen 5 2400G
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 2400G |
$ 159.0 | ||||
132 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen 7 1700
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 7 1700 |
$ 190. 0 | ||||
133 | 2015 | Intel Core i5-6500 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-6500 |
$ 234.4 | ||||
134 | 2010 | Intel Core i7-2600 @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-2600 |
$ 150.0 | ||||
135 | 2010 | Intel Core i7-2600K @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-2600K |
$ 198.0 | ||||
136 | 2012 | Intel Core i7-3820 @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-3820 |
$ 200.0 | ||||
137 | 2019 | AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 3 3200G |
$ 99.0 | ||||
138 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3570 @ 3. 40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3570 |
$ 140.0 | ||||
139 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3570K @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3570K |
$ 144.0 | ||||
140 | 2013 | Intel Core i5-4570S @ 2.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4570S |
$ 221.6 | ||||
141 | 2016 | Intel Core i5-6402P @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-6402P |
$ 190.0 | ||||
142 | 2018 | AMD Ryzen 3 2200G
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 3 2200G |
$ 98.0 | ||||
143 | 2017 | Intel Core i3-7100 @ 3.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-7100 |
$ 170. 0 | ||||
144 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3550 @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3550 |
$ 330.0 | ||||
145 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3550S @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3550S |
$ 341.0 | ||||
146 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3570S @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3570S |
$ 285.0 | ||||
147 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen 3 1300X
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 3 1300X |
$ 125.0 | ||||
148 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-2550K @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2550K |
$ 130.0 | ||||
149 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3470 @ 3. 20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3470 |
$ 125.0 | ||||
150 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3475S @ 2.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3475S |
$ 143.5 | ||||
151 | 2014 | Intel Core i5-4460 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4460 |
$ 170.0 | ||||
152 | 2014 | Intel Core i5-4460S @ 2.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4460S |
$ 660.0 | ||||
153 | 2015 | Intel Core i5-6400 @ 2.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-6400 |
$ 200.0 | ||||
154 | 2013 | Intel Core i5-4440 @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4440 |
$ 170. 0 | ||||
155 | 2013 | Intel Core i5-4440S @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4440S |
$ 463.0 | ||||
156 | 2011 | Intel Core i7-2600S @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-2600S |
$ 200.0 | ||||
157 | 2010 | Intel Core i5-2500 @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2500 |
$ 105.0 | ||||
158 | 2010 | Intel Core i5-2500K @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2500K |
$ 124.0 | ||||
159 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3450 @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3450 |
$ 128.0 | ||||
160 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3470S @ 2. 90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3470S |
$ 140.1 | ||||
161 | 2013 | Intel Core i5-4430 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4430 |
$ 180.0 | ||||
162 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen 5 1400
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 5 1400 |
$ 134.0 | ||||
163 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3450S @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3450S |
$ 100.0 | ||||
164 | 2017 | AMD Ryzen 3 1200
>> compare E6850 vs Ryzen 3 1200 |
$ 95.0 | ||||
165 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-2450P @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2450P |
$ 90.0 | ||||
166 | 2011 | Intel Core i5-2500S @ 2. 70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2500S |
$ 75.0 | ||||
167 | 2013 | Intel Core i5-3340 @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3340 |
$ 262.0 | ||||
168 | 2013 | Intel Core i5-4430S @ 2.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-4430S |
$ 160.0 | ||||
169 | 2011 | Intel Core i7-990X @ 3.47GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-990X |
$ 350.0 | ||||
170 | 2010 | Intel Core i5-2400 @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2400 |
$ 84.0 | ||||
171 | 2013 | Intel Core i5-3340S @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3340S |
$ 150. 0 | ||||
172 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3350P @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3350P |
$ 170.0 | ||||
173 | 2011 | Intel Core i5-2320 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2320 |
$ 195.3 | ||||
174 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-2380P @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2380P |
$ 90.0 | ||||
175 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3330 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3330 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
176 | 2012 | Intel Core i5-3330S @ 2.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-3330S |
$ 95.0 | ||||
177 | 2010 | Intel Core i7-980X @ 3. 33GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-980X |
$ 220.0 | ||||
178 | 2013 | AMD FX-9590 Eight-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-9590 |
$ 122.0 | ||||
179 | 2011 | Intel Core i5-2310 @ 2.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2310 |
$ 80.0 | ||||
180 | 2011 | Intel Core i5-2400S @ 2.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2400S |
$ 65.7 | ||||
181 | 2011 | Intel Core i5-2405S @ 2.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2405S |
$ 164.4 | ||||
182 | 2011 | Intel Core i7-980 @ 3.33GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-980 |
$ 200.0 | ||||
183 | 2013 | AMD FX-9370 Eight-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-9370 |
$ 178. 9 | ||||
184 | 2010 | Intel Core i5-680 @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-680 |
$ 90.0 | ||||
185 | 2014 | AMD FX-8370 Eight-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-8370 |
$ 135.0 | ||||
186 | 2014 | AMD FX-8370E Eight-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-8370E |
$ 180.0 | ||||
187 | 2011 | Intel Core i5-2300 @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-2300 |
$ 80.0 | ||||
188 | 2010 | Intel Core i7-970 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-970 |
$ 150.0 | ||||
189 | 2009 | Intel Core i7-975 @ 3. 33GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-975 |
$ 180.0 | ||||
190 | 2012 | AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-8350 |
$ 80.0 | ||||
191 | 2014 | Intel Core i3-4370 @ 3.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-4370 |
$ 450.0 | ||||
192 | 2015 | Intel Core i3-6320 @ 3.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-6320 |
$ 160.0 | ||||
193 | 2013 | AMD Athlon X4 760K Quad Core
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon X4 760K |
$ 46.0 | ||||
194 | 2012 | AMD FX-8320 Eight-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-8320 |
$ 79.5 | ||||
195 | 2015 | Intel Core i3-6300 @ 3. 80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-6300 |
$ 143.0 | ||||
196 | 2010 | Intel Core i5-655K @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-655K |
$ 60.0 | ||||
197 | 2010 | Intel Core i5-670 @ 3.47GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-670 |
$ 90.0 | ||||
198 | 2010 | Intel Core i7-880 @ 3.07GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-880 |
$ 583.0 | ||||
199 | 2009 | Intel Core i7-960 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-960 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
200 | 2008 | Intel Core i7-965 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-965 |
$ 140.0 | ||||
201 | 2015 | Intel Core i3-4170 @ 3. 70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-4170 |
$ 150.0 | ||||
202 | 2014 | Intel Core i3-4360 @ 3.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-4360 |
$ 280.0 | ||||
203 | 2015 | Intel Core i3-6100 @ 3.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-6100 |
$ 166.1 | ||||
204 | 2013 | AMD FX-8300 Eight-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-8300 |
$ 80.6 | ||||
205 | 2014 | Intel Core i3-4160 @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-4160 |
$ 140.0 | ||||
206 | 2013 | Intel Core i3-4340 @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-4340 |
$ 170.0 | ||||
207 | 2014 | Intel Core i3-4350 @ 3. 60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-4350 |
$ 170.0 | ||||
208 | 2016 | Intel Core i3-6098P @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-6098P |
$ 133.7 | ||||
209 | 2009 | Intel Core i5-660 @ 3.33GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-660 |
$ 49.0 | ||||
210 | 2009 | Intel Core i7-870 @ 2.93GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-870 |
$ 310.0 | ||||
211 | 2009 | Intel Core i7-950 @ 3.07GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-950 |
$ 245.0 | ||||
212 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Extreme X9770 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs X9770 |
$ 1,609. 0 | ||||
213 | 2009 | Intel Core2 Extreme X9775 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs X9775 |
$ 1,806.0 | ||||
214 | 2014 | AMD FX-8320E Eight-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-8320E |
$ 98.9 | ||||
215 | 2011 | AMD FX-8150 Eight-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-8150 |
$ 383.5 | ||||
216 | 2010 | AMD Phenom II X6 1100T
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X6 1100T |
$ 200.0 | ||||
217 | 2014 | Intel Core i3-4150 @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-4150 |
$ 260.0 | ||||
218 | 2013 | Intel Core i3-4330 @ 3. 50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-4330 |
$ 180.0 | ||||
219 | 2010 | Intel Core i5-650 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-650 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
220 | 2010 | Intel Core i5-661 @ 3.33GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-661 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
221 | 2011 | Intel Core i7-860S @ 2.53GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-860S |
$ 200.0 | ||||
222 | 2010 | Intel Core i7-875K @ 2.93GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-875K |
$ 200.0 | ||||
223 | 2008 | Intel Core i7-940 @ 2.93GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-940 |
$ 70.7 | ||||
224 | 2012 | AMD Athlon X4 740 Quad Core
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon X4 740 |
$ 277. 0 | ||||
225 | 2011 | AMD FX-8120 Eight-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-8120 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
226 | 2010 | AMD Phenom II X6 1090T
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X6 1090T |
$ 396.1 | ||||
227 | 2010 | Intel Core i5-760 @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-760 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
228 | 2009 | Intel Core i7-860 @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-860 |
$ 290.0 | ||||
229 | 2010 | Intel Core i7-930 @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-930 |
$ 60.0 | ||||
230 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E8600 @ 3. 33GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E8600 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
231 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Extreme X9650 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs X9650 |
$ 909.0 | ||||
232 | 2013 | Intel Core i3-4130 @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-4130 |
$ 140.0 | ||||
233 | 2013 | AMD FX-6350 Six-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-6350 |
$ 130.0 | ||||
234 | 2010 | AMD Phenom II X6 1075T
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X6 1075T |
$ 260.0 | ||||
235 | 2008 | Intel Core i7-920 @ 2.67GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i7-920 |
$ 174.0 | ||||
236 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E8500 @ 3. 16GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E8500 |
$ 40.0 | ||||
237 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X4 965
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 965 |
$ 59.5 | ||||
238 | 2010 | AMD Phenom II X6 1055T
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X6 1055T |
$ 185.0 | ||||
239 | 2013 | Intel Core i3-3250 @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-3250 |
$ 95.0 | ||||
240 | 2009 | Intel Core i5-750 @ 2.67GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5-750 |
$ 160.5 | ||||
241 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Extreme Q6850 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q6850 |
$ 1,496. 0 | ||||
242 | 2012 | AMD FX-6300 Six-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-6300 |
$ 59.0 | ||||
243 | 2012 | Intel Core i3-3240 @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-3240 |
$ 46.0 | ||||
244 | 2013 | Intel Core i3-3245 @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-3245 |
$ 80.0 | ||||
245 | 2018 | Intel Pentium Gold G5600 @ 3.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium Gold G5600 |
$ 100.9 | ||||
246 | 2011 | AMD Athlon II X3 460
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X3 460 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
247 | 2012 | AMD FX-6200 Six-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-6200 |
$ 340. 0 | ||||
248 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X4 955
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 955 |
$ 130.2 | ||||
249 | 2011 | AMD Phenom II X4 960T
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 960T |
$ 135.0 | ||||
250 | 2010 | AMD Phenom II X4 B97
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 B97 |
$ 90.0 | ||||
251 | 2010 | AMD Phenom II X6 1045T
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X6 1045T |
$ 175.0 | ||||
252 | 2011 | Intel Core i3-2130 @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-2130 |
$ 70.0 | ||||
253 | 2012 | Intel Core i3-3220 @ 3. 30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-3220 |
$ 34.9 | ||||
254 | 2012 | Intel Core i3-3225 @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-3225 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
255 | 2009 | Intel Core2 Duo E7500 @ 2.93GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E7500 |
$ 15.0 | ||||
256 | 2009 | Intel Core2 Duo E7600 @ 3.06GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E7600 |
$ 120.0 | ||||
257 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E8400 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E8400 |
$ 9.8 | ||||
258 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Extreme Q6800 @ 2.93GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q6800 |
$ 1,125. 0 | ||||
259 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Quad Q9650 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q9650 |
$ 69.8 | ||||
260 | 2018 | Intel Pentium Gold G5400 @ 3.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium Gold G5400 |
$ 123.9 | ||||
261 | 2018 | Intel Pentium Gold G5500 @ 3.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium Gold G5500 |
$ 100.3 | ||||
262 | 2011 | AMD Athlon II X2 270
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 270 |
$ 24.0 | ||||
263 | 2012 | AMD Athlon II X2 B28
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 B28 |
$ 49.1 | ||||
264 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X3 455
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X3 455 |
$ 116. 9 | ||||
265 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X4 645
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X4 645 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
266 | 2011 | AMD Phenom II X4 840
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 840 |
$ 90.0 | ||||
267 | 2010 | AMD Phenom II X6 1035T
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X6 1035T |
$ 189.0 | ||||
268 | 2013 | Intel Core i3-3210 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-3210 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
269 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E8300 @ 2.83GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E8300 |
$ 20.0 | ||||
270 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Quad Q9550 @ 2. 83GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q9550 |
$ 49.0 | ||||
271 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X2 265
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 265 |
$ 82.9 | ||||
272 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X3 450
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X3 450 |
$ 40.0 | ||||
273 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X4 640
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X4 640 |
$ 80.0 | ||||
274 | 2011 | AMD Phenom II X2 565
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X2 565 |
$ 30.0 | ||||
275 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X4 940
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 940 |
$ 120.0 | ||||
276 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X4 945
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 945 |
$ 50. 0 | ||||
277 | 2010 | AMD Phenom II X4 B95
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 B95 |
$ 73.0 | ||||
278 | 2011 | Intel Core i3-2120 @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-2120 |
$ 30.0 | ||||
279 | 2011 | Intel Core i3-2125 @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-2125 |
$ 199.0 | ||||
280 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E6850 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E6850 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
281 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E7300 @ 2.66GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E7300 |
$ 20.0 | ||||
282 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E7400 @ 2. 80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E7400 |
$ 29.0 | ||||
283 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E8200 @ 2.66GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E8200 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
284 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Extreme X6800 @ 2.93GHz
>> compare E6850 vs X6800 |
$ 263.6 | ||||
285 | 2010 | Intel Core2 Quad Q9500 @ 2.83GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q9500 |
$ 35.0 | ||||
286 | 2017 | Intel Pentium G4620 @ 3.70GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G4620 |
$ 105.9 | ||||
287 | 2016 | Intel Core i3-2102 @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-2102 |
$ 58. 0 | ||||
288 | 2009 | Intel Core2 Quad Q9505 @ 2.83GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q9505 |
$ 190.0 | ||||
289 | 2014 | Intel Pentium G3258 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G3258 |
$ 178.3 | ||||
290 | 2015 | Intel Pentium G3470 @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G3470 |
$ 104.3 | ||||
291 | 2015 | Intel Pentium G4520 @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G4520 |
$ 110.9 | ||||
292 | 2017 | Intel Pentium G4600 @ 3.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G4600 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
293 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X2 260
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 260 |
$ 20. 0 | ||||
294 | 2009 | AMD Athlon II X3 435
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X3 435 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
295 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X3 440
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X3 440 |
$ 47.0 | ||||
296 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X3 445
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X3 445 |
$ 91.0 | ||||
297 | 2009 | AMD Athlon II X4 630
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X4 630 |
$ 43.0 | ||||
298 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X4 635
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X4 635 |
$ 70.0 | ||||
299 | 2012 | AMD Athlon II X4 641 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X4 641 |
$ 91. 5 | ||||
300 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X2 550
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X2 550 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
301 | 2010 | AMD Phenom II X2 555
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X2 555 |
$ 142.1 | ||||
302 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X4 820
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 820 |
$ 75.0 | ||||
303 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X4 920
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 920 |
$ 67.0 | ||||
304 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X4 925
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 925 |
$ 160.0 | ||||
305 | 2011 | Intel Core i3-2100 @ 3. 10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-2100 |
$ 60.0 | ||||
306 | 2011 | Intel Core i3-2105 @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-2105 |
$ 80.0 | ||||
307 | 2012 | Intel Core i5 750S @ 2.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i5 750S |
$ 100.0 | ||||
308 | 2014 | Intel Pentium G3450 @ 3.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G3450 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
309 | 2014 | Intel Pentium G3460 @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G3460 |
$ 288.2 | ||||
310 | 2017 | Intel Pentium G4560 @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G4560 |
$ 103. 1 | ||||
311 | 2009 | AMD Athlon II X2 250
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 250 |
$ 39.0 | ||||
312 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X2 255
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 255 |
$ 65.2 | ||||
313 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X2 B24
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 B24 |
$ 40.0 | ||||
314 | 2009 | AMD Athlon II X4 620
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X4 620 |
$ 60.0 | ||||
315 | 2011 | AMD Athlon II X4 631 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X4 631 |
$ 80.0 | ||||
316 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X2 545
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X2 545 |
$ 44. 0 | ||||
317 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X2 B55
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X2 B55 |
$ 48.0 | ||||
318 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X3 720
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X3 720 |
$ 70.0 | ||||
319 | 2010 | AMD Phenom II X3 B73
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X3 B73 |
$ 75.0 | ||||
320 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X4 810
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 810 |
$ 116.0 | ||||
321 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X4 910
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 910 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
322 | 2010 | AMD Phenom II X4 910e
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 910e |
$ 157. 0 | ||||
323 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E6750 @ 2.66GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E6750 |
$ 13.0 | ||||
324 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E7200 @ 2.53GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E7200 |
$ 75.0 | ||||
325 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Quad Q9450 @ 2.66GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q9450 |
$ 335.0 | ||||
326 | 2015 | Intel Pentium G4500 @ 3.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G4500 |
$ 85.3 | ||||
327 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 6400+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 6400+ |
$ 260.0 | ||||
328 | 2009 | AMD Athlon 7850 Dual-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 7850 |
$ 209. 7 | ||||
329 | 2009 | AMD Athlon II X2 245
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 245 |
$ 35.0 | ||||
330 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X2 B22
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 B22 |
$ 36.0 | ||||
331 | 2009 | AMD Athlon II X3 425
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X3 425 |
$ 104.2 | ||||
332 | 2008 | AMD Phenom 9950 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9950 |
$ 180.0 | ||||
333 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X3 710
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X3 710 |
$ 84.5 | ||||
334 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X4 805
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 805 |
$ 174. 0 | ||||
335 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X4 905e
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X4 905e |
$ 212.4 | ||||
336 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E4700 @ 2.60GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E4700 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
337 | 2010 | Intel Core2 Duo E6700 @ 2.66GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E6700 |
$ 30.0 | ||||
338 | 2009 | Intel Core2 Quad Q8400 @ 2.66GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q8400 |
$ 99.5 | ||||
339 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Quad Q9400 @ 2.66GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q9400 |
$ 34.0 | ||||
340 | 2015 | Intel Pentium G3260 @ 3. 30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G3260 |
$ 105.0 | ||||
341 | 2016 | AMD Athlon X4 845
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon X4 845 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
342 | 2013 | AMD FX-4350 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-4350 |
$ 130.0 | ||||
343 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Quad Q6700 @ 2.66GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q6700 |
$ 45.0 | ||||
344 | 2009 | Intel Core2 Quad Q8300 @ 2.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q8300 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
345 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Quad Q9300 @ 2.50GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q9300 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
346 | 2014 | Intel Pentium G3250 @ 3. 20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G3250 |
$ 110.0 | ||||
347 | 2013 | Intel Pentium G3420 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G3420 |
$ 110.0 | ||||
348 | 2013 | Intel Pentium G3430 @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G3430 |
$ 90.0 | ||||
349 | 2014 | Intel Pentium G3440 @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G3440 |
$ 159.9 | ||||
350 | 2015 | Intel Pentium G4400 @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G4400 |
$ 80.0 | ||||
351 | 2009 | AMD Athlon 7750 Dual-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 7750 |
$ 148. 7 | ||||
352 | 2009 | AMD Athlon II X2 215
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 215 |
$ 12.0 | ||||
353 | 2010 | AMD Athlon II X2 220
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 220 |
$ 32.2 | ||||
354 | 2009 | AMD Athlon II X2 240
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon II X2 240 |
$ 35.0 | ||||
355 | 2017 | AMD Athlon X4 950
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon X4 950 |
$ 60.0 | ||||
356 | 2012 | AMD FX-4300 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-4300 |
$ 53.4 | ||||
357 | 2008 | AMD Phenom 9750 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9750 |
$ 60. 0 | ||||
358 | 2008 | AMD Phenom 9850 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9850 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
359 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E6600 @ 2.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E6600 |
$ 15.0 | ||||
360 | 2014 | Intel Pentium G2140 @ 3.30GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G2140 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
361 | 2009 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5800+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 5800+ |
$ 25.0 | ||||
362 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 6000+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 6000+ |
$ 46.0 | ||||
363 | 2016 | AMD Athlon X4 880K
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon X4 880K |
$ 90. 0 | ||||
364 | 2013 | AMD FX-4200 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-4200 |
$ 228.2 | ||||
365 | 2010 | AMD Phenom 9450e Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9450e |
$ 105.0 | ||||
366 | 2008 | AMD Phenom 9550 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9550 |
$ 40.0 | ||||
367 | 2009 | AMD Phenom 9600B Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9600B |
$ 147.2 | ||||
368 | 2008 | AMD Phenom 9650 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9650 |
$ 55.0 | ||||
369 | 2009 | AMD Phenom II X3 705e
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom II X3 705e |
$ 152. 3 | ||||
370 | 2010 | Intel Core i3-560 @ 3.33GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-560 |
$ 30.0 | ||||
371 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E4600 @ 2.40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E4600 |
$ 158.0 | ||||
372 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E6550 @ 2.33GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E6550 |
$ 15.0 | ||||
373 | 2014 | Intel Pentium G3240 @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G3240 |
$ 80.0 | ||||
374 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5200+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 5200+ |
$ 53.1 | ||||
375 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5400+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 5400+ |
$ 53. 0 | ||||
376 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5600+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 5600+ |
$ 150.0 | ||||
377 | 2009 | AMD Athlon 7550 Dual-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 7550 |
$ 60.0 | ||||
378 | 2012 | AMD FX-4170 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-4170 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
379 | 2009 | AMD Phenom 8600 Triple-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 8600 |
$ 53.0 | ||||
380 | 2009 | AMD Phenom 8600B Triple-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 8600B |
$ 53.0 | ||||
381 | 2008 | AMD Phenom 8650 Triple-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 8650 |
$ 50. 0 | ||||
382 | 2008 | AMD Phenom 9500 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9500 |
$ 60.0 | ||||
383 | 2008 | AMD Phenom 9600 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9600 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
384 | 2009 | Intel Core2 Duo E6400 @ 2.13GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E6400 |
$ 20.0 | ||||
385 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E6420 @ 2.13GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E6420 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
386 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E4500 @ 2.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E4500 |
$ 40.0 | ||||
387 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 @ 2. 40GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q6600 |
$ 40.0 | ||||
388 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Quad Q8200 @ 2.33GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Q8200 |
$ 23.0 | ||||
389 | 2013 | Intel Pentium G2130 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G2130 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
390 | 2013 | Intel Pentium G3220 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G3220 |
$ 120.0 | ||||
391 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5200+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 5200+ |
$ 53.1 | ||||
392 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5400+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 5400+ |
$ 53. 0 | ||||
393 | 2014 | AMD Athlon X4 860K
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon X4 860K |
$ 64.0 | ||||
394 | 2016 | AMD Athlon X4 870K
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon X4 870K |
$ 80.0 | ||||
395 | 2011 | AMD FX-4100 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-4100 |
$ 130.0 | ||||
396 | 2012 | AMD FX-4130 Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs FX-4130 |
$ 76.0 | ||||
397 | 2010 | Intel Core i3-550 @ 3.20GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-550 |
$ 180.0 | ||||
398 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5000+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 5000+ |
$ 331. 5 | ||||
399 | 2009 | AMD Athlon Dual Core 5000B
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon Dual 5000B |
$ 95.0 | ||||
400 | 2015 | AMD Athlon X4 840
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon X4 840 |
$ 78.7 | ||||
401 | 2011 | AMD E2-3200 APU
>> compare E6850 vs E2-3200 APU |
$ 8.0 | ||||
402 | 2008 | AMD Phenom 8450 Triple-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 8450 |
$ 30.0 | ||||
403 | 2009 | AMD Phenom 9350e Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9350e |
$ 3,382.1 | ||||
404 | 2009 | AMD Phenom X3 8550
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom X3 8550 |
$ 170. 0 | ||||
405 | 2010 | Intel Core i3-540 @ 3.07GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-540 |
$ 21.0 | ||||
406 | 2013 | Intel Pentium G2030 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G2030 |
$ 41.0 | ||||
407 | 2012 | Intel Pentium G2120 @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G2120 |
$ 46.0 | ||||
408 | 2012 | Intel Pentium G870 @ 3.10GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G870 |
$ 97.0 | ||||
409 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5000+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 5000+ |
$ 331.5 | ||||
410 | 2009 | AMD Athlon 5000 Dual-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 5000 |
$ 100. 0 | ||||
411 | 2010 | AMD Athlon 5200 Dual-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 5200 |
$ 30.0 | ||||
412 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4600+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 4600+ |
$ 360.0 | ||||
413 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4800+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 4800+ |
$ 460.0 | ||||
414 | 2009 | AMD Phenom 9150e Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9150e |
$ 40.0 | ||||
415 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E4400 @ 2.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E4400 |
$ 9.0 | ||||
416 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E6320 @ 1. 86GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E6320 |
$ 50.0 | ||||
417 | 2011 | Intel Pentium G860 @ 3.00GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G860 |
$ 30.0 | ||||
418 | 2009 | AMD Athlon 5000 Dual-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 5000 |
$ 100.0 | ||||
419 | 2010 | AMD Athlon 5200 Dual-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 5200 |
$ 30.0 | ||||
420 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4600+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 4600+ |
$ 360.0 | ||||
421 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4800+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 4800+ |
$ 460. 0 | ||||
422 | 2010 | Intel Core i3-530 @ 2.93GHz
>> compare E6850 vs i3-530 |
$ 20.0 | ||||
423 | 2013 | Intel Pentium G2020 @ 2.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G2020 |
$ 32.9 | ||||
424 | 2011 | Intel Pentium G850 @ 2.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G850 |
$ 30.0 | ||||
425 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 4200+ |
$ 130.0 | ||||
426 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4400+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 4400+ |
$ 60.0 | ||||
427 | 2009 | AMD Phenom 8250e Triple-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 8250e |
$ 47. 0 | ||||
428 | 2009 | AMD Phenom 9100e Quad-Core
>> compare E6850 vs Phenom 9100e |
$ 40.0 | ||||
429 | 2009 | Intel Core2 Duo E4300 @ 1.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E4300 |
$ 158.0 | ||||
430 | 2008 | Intel Core2 Duo E6300 @ 1.86GHz
>> compare E6850 vs E6300 |
$ 13.0 | ||||
431 | 2013 | Intel Pentium G2010 @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G2010 |
$ 34.9 | ||||
432 | 2012 | Intel Pentium G645 @ 2.90GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G645 |
$ 95.0 | ||||
433 | 2011 | Intel Pentium G840 @ 2. 80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G840 |
$ 35.0 | ||||
434 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 4200+ |
$ 130.0 | ||||
435 | 2008 | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4400+
>> compare E6850 vs Athlon 64 X2 Dual 4400+ |
$ 60.0 | ||||
436 | 2012 | Intel Pentium G640 @ 2.80GHz
>> compare E6850 vs Pentium G640 |
$ 25.0 |
List of comparisons between Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Intel Core 2 Duo
|
|
|
List of comparisons between Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Intel Core 2 Duo
List of comparisons of technical characteristics between the processor Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 and the processors group Intel Core 2 Duo, with also the respective performance in the benchmarks. Click on one of the links to access the desired comparison.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
Comparisons:
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo T9600 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2800 | 2800 | 6000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo T9400 | 4 | 4 | 2. 4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2530 | 2530 | 6000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo T9300 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2500 | 2500 | 6000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo T8100 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2100 | 2100 | 3000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo T7250 | 4 | 4 | 2. 4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo T7200 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2000 | 2000 | 4000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo T6600 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2200 | 2200 | 2000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo T5600 | 4 | 4 | 2. 4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 1830 | 1830 | 2000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo P8700 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2530 | 2530 | 3000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo P8600 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2400 | 2400 | 3000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo P8400 | 4 | 4 | 2. 4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2260 | 2260 | 3000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo P7350 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2000 | 2000 | 3000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 3330 | 3330 | 6000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 | 4 | 4 | 2. 4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 3160 | 3160 | 6000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 3000 | 3000 | 6000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E8200 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2660 | 2660 | 6000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E7600 | 4 | 4 | 2. 4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 3060 | 3060 | 3000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E7500 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2930 | 2930 | 3000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2930 | 2800 | 3000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E7300 | 4 | 4 | 2. 4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2660 | 2660 | 3000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E7200 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2530 | 2530 | 3000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 3000 | 3000 | 4000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 | 4 | 4 | 2. 4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2660 | 2660 | 4000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2660 | 2660 | 4000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2400 | 2400 | 4000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E6550 | 4 | 4 | 2. 4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2330 | 2330 | 4000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2130 | 2130 | 2000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 1860 | 1860 | 2000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E4600 | 4 | 4 | 2. 4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2400 | 2400 | 2000 |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E4500 | 4 | 4 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2200 | 2200 | 2000 |
Intel Core 2 refresh: QX6850, E6850 & E6750
Written by
Tim Smalley
July 17, 2007 | 09:28
Tags: #2 #computing #core #dual #dual-core #duo #e6750 #e6850 #evaluation #extreme #performance #pricing #quad #quad-core #qx6850 #refresh #review #specs #trusted
Companies: #intel
1 — Introduction, Pricing2 — Trusted Execution Technology3 — Test Setup4 — Oblivion5 — Supreme Commander6 — Call of Duty 2 & Quake 47 — Valve Particle Simulation & Cinebench8 — POV-Ray9 — Photoshop Elements & WinRAR10 — VirtualDub Xvid Encoding & LAME MT11 — Final Thoughts. ..
We used the latest addition to the impressive Elder Scrolls series of titles, Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion with the 1.2 patch applied. It uses the Gamebyro engine and features DirectX 9.0 shaders, the Havok physics engine and Bethesda use SpeedTree for rendering the trees.
The world is made up of trees, stunning landscapes, lush grass and features High Dynamic Range (HDR) lighting and soft shadowing. If you want to learn more about The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, we recommend giving our graphics and gameplay review a read.
The graphics options are hugely comprehensive, with four screens of options available for you to tweak to your heart’s content. There is also the configuration file too, but we’ve kept things as simple as possible by leaving that in its out of the box state. For our testing, we used a two minute section walking through a wooded area, down into a valley. This test scenario features lots of vegetation and trees, and is one of the most intense sections we’ve found in the game. We set all of the in-game details to their maximum settings, but left both anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering disabled.
- Core 2 Duo E6850 (2×3.00GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 4MB L2)
- Core 2 Extreme QX6850 (4×3.00GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 2x4MB L2)
- Core 2 Extreme X6800 (2×2.93GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 4MB L2)
- Core 2 Duo E6750 (2×2.66GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 4MB L2)
- Core 2 Extreme QX6800 (4×2.93GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 2x4MB L2)
- Core 2 Duo E6700 (2×2.66GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 4MB L2)
- Core 2 Quad Q6700 (4×2.67GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 2x4MB L2)
- Core 2 Duo E6600 (2×2.40GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 4MB L2)
- Core 2 Quad Q6600 (4×2.40GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 2x4MB L2)
- Athlon 64 X2 6000+ (2×3. 0GHz, 2x1MB L2)
- Athlon 64 X2 5600+ (2×2.8GHz, 2x1MB L2)
- Athlon 64 X2 5200+ (2×2.6GHz, 2x1MB L2)
-
-
75.2
-
54.5
-
-
-
74.9
-
53.0
-
-
-
73.3
-
53.0
-
-
-
72.8
-
50.0
-
-
-
71.9
-
51.0
-
-
-
71. 3
-
49.5
-
-
-
69.4
-
48.0
-
-
-
65.9
-
40.0
-
-
-
65.0
-
42.5
-
-
-
62.9
-
42.0
-
-
-
59.2
-
37.0
-
-
-
57.7
-
35. 0
-
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Frames Per Second
-
Average
-
Minimum
- Core 2 Extreme QX6850 (4×3.00GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 2x4MB L2)
- Core 2 Duo E6850 (2×3.00GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 4MB L2)
- Core 2 Extreme QX6800 (4×2.93GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 2x4MB L2)
- Core 2 Extreme X6800 (2×2.93GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 4MB L2)
- Core 2 Duo E6750 (2×2.66GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 4MB L2)
- Core 2 Duo E6700 (2×2.66GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 4MB L2)
- Core 2 Duo E6600 (2×2.40GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 4MB L2)
- Athlon 64 X2 6000+ (2×3.0GHz, 2x1MB L2)
- Core 2 Quad Q6700 (4×2.67GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 2x4MB L2)
- Athlon 64 X2 5600+ (2×2. 8GHz, 2x1MB L2)
- Athlon 64 X2 5200+ (2×2.6GHz, 2x1MB L2)
- Core 2 Quad Q6600 (4×2.40GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 2x4MB L2)
-
-
57.6
-
41.0
-
-
-
56.9
-
41.5
-
-
-
56.8
-
40.0
-
-
-
56.7
-
40.5
-
-
-
56.7
-
41.5
-
-
-
56. 6
-
39.5
-
-
-
56.5
-
39.0
-
-
-
56.1
-
40.0
-
-
-
55.8
-
38.0
-
-
-
55.2
-
35.0
-
-
-
54.8
-
34.0
-
-
-
54.5
-
38. 5
-
10
20
30
40
50
60
Frames Per Second
-
Average
-
Minimum
At lower resolutions, the E6850 was fractionally the fastest processor in Oblivion, but as the resolution increased the Core 2 Extreme QX6850 managed to stretch its legs and beat out the E6850 by around 1.2 percent at the same clock speed. Further down the performance chart, the E6750 managed to squeeze out a draw with the faster Core 2 Extreme X6800, even despite its 266MHz clock speed deficit; that said, the Core 2 Duo E6700 was only a fraction slower than both of these chips.
AMD’s fastest single socket processor was just a few fractions of a frame per second slower than the competition and, really speaking, you’re not going to notice any performance differences between these processors in a typical real-world gaming scenario as you’ll be graphics limited once you start introducing anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering into the equation.
1 — Introduction, Pricing2 — Trusted Execution Technology3 — Test Setup4 — Oblivion5 — Supreme Commander6 — Call of Duty 2 & Quake 47 — Valve Particle Simulation & Cinebench8 — POV-Ray9 — Photoshop Elements & WinRAR10 — VirtualDub Xvid Encoding & LAME MT11 — Final Thoughts…
Core 2 Duo vs Quad core
apple1ma
Posts: 14 +0
-
-
#1
Im looking to get a new computer and im debating on which processor..
The first one is an Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 2. 4GHz 2 x 4MB L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor with 1066mhz FSB
Or a Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe 3.0GHz 4M shared L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor with 1333mhz FSB.
I was leaning more towards the quad core, but im not sure what im losing or gaining.
Tedster
Posts: 5,746 +14
-
-
#2
You will not gain hardly anything with a quad core. Few software take advantage of multi-cores. Fewer still handle more than 2 cores. Unless you’re doing video editing, CD/DVD burning, anti-virus checking, while surfing playing a game, etc…. don’t bother. Just get 2 cores.
apple1ma
Posts: 14 +0
-
-
#3
Hmm, well the quad core is 20 dollars cheaper so its not really a price issue just wanted to know how much a difference it’ll be. Since a quad core would be better for the long run i think i’ll grab one now since i can get a pretty decent one at a resonable price.
k.jacko
Posts: 483 +0
-
-
#4
I’d go Q6600, cos its cheaper! nuff sed!
If you want to overclock, then the core2duo’s do that in spades, which will boost performance way above the quads, as they don’t OC as well.
nickc
Posts: 921 +11
-
-
#5
apple1ma said:
Im looking to get a new computer and im debating on which processor..
Or a Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe 3.0GHz 4M shared L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor with 1333mhz FSB.
I was leaning more towards the quad core, but im not sure what im losing or gaining.
Click to expand…
that is the fastest processor u have ever imagined useing and u would be very prod of it I am on one right now and everything u do is fast. i say go for the E6850 Conroe and do not worry u will be proud.
Kev-Intel
-
-
#6
Go for the Quad Core Q6600…Invest now!!!
First of all processors get older quicker than daily newspapers.
So since you are investing better invest for the future.
Go for the quad core and rest in the future.
Don’t worry about its actual use,application are on their way to make full user of this powerful processor.
The Core 2 Duo E6600 is ok but just for some $ being saved,think about how much you are going to save for the future.
By the way don’t forget to have a Geforce 7600GT or Geforce 8800GT…if you have money left for the second choice
captaincranky
Posts: 18,824 +7,752
-
-
#7
Hmmm….
Isn’t it likely that we’ll be at the next generation of quad core processors before the software catches up that can utilize it? If you believe that to be the case, then the Q6600 really isn’t future-proof at all. It would hinder you at the present, and the new C2Ds should outperform it.
apple1ma
Posts: 14 +0
-
-
#8
i heard 8 cores were announced -. -, the thing is the q6600 is 20 dollars cheaper than the dual core i posted so its a pretty cheap for 4 processors. My budget right now is kinda tight, im spending about 1400 w/o hard drives and cd drives, but by the time they release faster quad cores i should have much more money to play around with.
Bruce2
Posts: 11 +0
-
-
#9
Here you can compair the two with different chioce of benchmark:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=872&model2=871&chart=419
LinkedKube
Posts: 3,382 +53
-
-
#10
I did away with my quad because 45 nm processors dropping soon, I want one!
Halos
Posts: 27 +0
-
-
#11
I would go with the C2D for all the reasons people have already posted. By the time that software catches up with the Quad-Cores, we’ll be at least a generation past where we are now with hardware. If not more. The Dual-Core is going to perform great for you now and will be overclockable without a problem which will make it that much better than a Quad. Just my 2 cents.
beef_jerky4104
Posts: 782 +3
-
-
#12
Halos said:
I would go with the C2D for all the reasons people have already posted. By the time that software catches up with the Quad-Cores, we’ll be at least a generation past where we are now with hardware. If not more. The Dual-Core is going to perform great for you now and will be overclockable without a problem which will make it that much better than a Quad. Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand…
Beautifully said.
Best CPUs for Gaming in 2022 — Intel and AMD Ryzen CPUs
by XbitLabs Team
Last update 10 Sep 2022
XbitLabs participates in several affiliate programs. If you click links on our website and make a purchase, we may earn a commision. Learn More
The CPU is probably the most important part of a gaming PC. This makes finding the best CPU for gaming a vital task when you’re building a PC. However, there are a lot of choices out there though.
CPUs can be hard to compare, with technical details and marketing terms that don’t entirely give you an accurate picture of how they perform. If you’re looking to build a gaming PC, then the CPU needs to be the first thing you pick.
Your choice of CPU decides what motherboard, storage and even RAM you’re going to need. Essentially, when you’re finding a new CPU for gaming it is the most important of building a gaming PC.
A decent CPU can make your games run at a solid 120 FPS or even more, some even without sacrificing visual flairs like shadows or raytracing. If you’re streaming or running VR, you’ll need a CPU specifically built for that. The wrong one could leave you running a choppy 35 frames per second. It is really important to get the choice right.
The best gaming CPUs should be protected against future developments too. Finding the right one now will help your PC last longer. Advancements in CPUs can leave a PC outdated, so you need to start with something powerful that will age well.
These are some of the best CPUs out there at the moment:
Those are all great choices for getting the best CPU for gaming. However, which one is right for you is a little more complicated than that. The CPU is the foundation of your entire pc, so it is really important to make sure you’re finding the right one. This guide covers what you need to know when looking for the best CPU, so you can find the perfect one for your PC.
What You Need to Know
If you’re looking into building a gaming PC, then things can get complicated fast. You need to know what it is that you’re looking for. These are the terms and details that you need to know to compare these CPUs and find which is the right one for you.
- Which Brand? – AMD and Intel are by far the standout producers of CPUs out there. They make well-performing devices for a great price, and you know exactly what it is that you’re getting.
- Speed and Cores – If you’re looking for a CPU for gaming, then the speed of the device is much more important than just the core numbers. However, cores are still important you should just weigh the two concerns when considering them.
- Lifetime – A CPU is a big purchase and ideally one that you’ll want to last a while. Going for the most recent generation of CPU guarantees that you’ll be able to use for a while longer without it becoming too outdated. If you go for an older one, you’re likely to not get as much mileage out of it and less value in the long-term.
- Remember it is Just One Part of the PC – While a CPU is important, so is your storage and graphics. A budget CPU with other great components will do a lot more for you than a high-end CPU with little else around it.
What You Need to Consider Before the Purchase
Those are the basics of finding the right CPU for you. However, which one of these options will perfectly suit your needs will vary. This is what you need to consider about making the purchase. Thinking about these things should help you figure out which is right for you.
- What’s Your Budget? – This is probably the most important thing. Let’s be honest, which you can afford is the main factor in deciding which is right for you. However, on top of this, you need to be aware that more expensive isn’t always better. You can get a decent CPU for a good price, so if you’re working with a budget look for quality and value.
- Do You Need More Threads or Cores? – Cores are processors contained in your CPU. Each of them can handle different tasks, so more cores provide more power for multitasking. Threads are independent processes that each chip handles. Some threads can handle multithreading; this is hyper-threading, at least some CPUs call it that. You should aim for four of each to give you decent power, but you’ll have to think about whether more threads or cores are vital for which you need.
- What Clock Speed Do You Need? – The clock speed is the speed that your chip operates at. The higher it is, the faster it can go but most CPUs can adjust depending on their workload. Keep this in mind when deciding which CPU to purchase, as this is the important factor for a gaming CPU.
Should You Overclock Your CPU?
One thing a lot of people consider when finding the best CPU for gaming is overclocking. However, overclocking isn’t for everyone and if it is a good idea will partially depend on which CPU you’re using.
Overclocking involves settings your CPU up to achieve higher clock speeds than it is rated for. You’ll need to use specific motherboards and extra cooling to achieve this. The increased clock speed can be significant, but it can also be damaging.
In some cases, overclocking can really reduce the life expectancy of your CPU, so you may have to replace it sooner. Some devices won’t see much of an improvement from overclocking either.
As a guideline, overclocking isn’t for beginners. Overclocking when you don’t know what you’re doing can damage your machine. However, if you are looking to overclock your CPU you should keep this in mind when choosing one.
Finding a CPU with the right potential for overclocking can make sure you’re actually going to be getting a significant improvement rather than just a minor boost. Since overclocking is kind of a hassle, this is important.
The right CPU for one might be one that doesn’t need overclocking, but having the potential to unlock in the future can’t hurt.
Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs Core 2 Duo E6850
- Introduction
- Core 2 Quad Q6600 vs. Core 2 Duo E6850: General
- Description of test system
- Acceleration
- Performance
- PCMark05
- SYSmark 2007
- 3D games
- Audio and video encoding
- Rendering
- Other applications
- Terminals
A month ago, the decline in prices for Intel processors was a milestone in the way of multi-core CPUs in consumer computers. Finally, the cost of quad-core processors has fallen to the level of dual-core models. More specifically, the youngest of the Core 2 Quad in the official price list is priced at the same price as the older Core 2 Duo. This amount, by the way, is $266, which, in our opinion, is quite enough to make processors with four cores a much more popular solution than they were before.
It was this state of affairs that prompted us to carry out another study, in which we decided to «push foreheads» a dual-core and quad-core CPU of the same cost, Core 2 Duo E6850 and Core 2 Quad Q6600. Indeed, a large number of users faced the problem of choosing among them the most suitable processor for their needs, since these products are now offered in retail stores at a reasonable price. At the same time, these processors are so different in their characteristics that even some professionals cannot make an unambiguous choice of the optimal solution. After all, these CPUs not only have a different number of cores, they also differ significantly in clock frequency and the bus frequency used.
There is an opinion that most of the resource-intensive applications released or updated recently are able to take advantage of multi-core processors. At the same time, this is not always true for old programs and games, which for the most part continue to operate with one or two computing threads. Therefore, in order to introduce some unambiguity into the current situation and to resolve the issue of the advisability of using quad-core processors instead of high-frequency dual-core processors in various applications, we decided to conduct special testing.
An additional intrigue in the confrontation between Core 2 Duo E6850 and Core 2 Quad Q6600 can be added by the fact that both these processors are based on exactly the same semiconductor cores. The fact is that modern quad-core Intel processors consist of a pair of dual-core crystals mounted side by side in one LGA775 package. Therefore, dual-core and quad-core processors of the Core family can be expected to behave the same way when overclocked. This, in turn, gives hope for the possibility of overclocking the Core 2 Quad Q6600 to the frequencies achieved by overclocking the Core 2 Duo E6850. That is, comparing 266-dollar competitors from overclocking positions promises to be even more exciting than testing them in normal mode. Moreover, both the Core 2 Duo E6850 and the recently released Core 2 Quad Q6600 processors use the new G0 stepping, which, according to our research, has slightly improved overclocking potential.
An almost complete picture of the strengths of a particular solution can be obtained by formally comparing the specifications of Core 2 Duo E6850 and Core 2 Quad Q6600 (new G0 stepping).
Core 2 Duo E6850 | Core 2 Quad Q6600 | |
---|---|---|
Codename | Conroe | Kentsfiled |
Rated frequency | 3. 0 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
Bus frequency | 1333 MHz | 1067 MHz |
Multiplier | 9x | 9x |
Second level cache | 4 MB | 2 x 4 MB |
Number of cores | 2 | 4 |
Packaging | LGA775 | LGA775 |
Production technology | 65 nm | 65 nm |
TDP | 65 W | 95W* |
Supply voltage | 0.962-1.350 V | 1.100-1.372 B |
Enhanced Halt State (C1E) Technology | Yes | Yes |
Enhanced Intel Speedstep | Yes | Yes |
Execute Disable Bit | Yes | Yes |
Intel EM64T | Yes | Yes |
Intel Thermal Monitor 2 | Yes | Yes |
Intel Virtualization Technology | Yes | Yes |
*
The value is for G0 stepping. Processors of previous steppings have a higher TDP of 105W.
Benefits of the dual-core Core 2 Duo E6850 over the quad-core Core 2 Quad Q6600:
- 25% higher clock speed for better performance in non-threaded applications.
- Higher bus frequency, which ultimately increases the speed of the memory subsystem. The peak bandwidth of the processor-memory line for a CPU with a 1333 MHz bus is 10.7 GB/s versus 8.5 GB/s for processors with a 1067 MHz bus.
- 46% lower heat dissipation, allowing the use of relatively simple and inexpensive cooling systems, including during overclocking.
Benefits of the quad-core Core 2 Quad Q6600 over the dual-core Core 2 Duo E6850:
- Double the number of cores for high performance in multithreaded applications and multitasking environments.
- Twice the total amount of L2 cache. This advantage is especially significant for users of Windows Vista, as this operating system has the means to intelligently distribute threads across cores with a shared or separate L2 cache.
Thus, each of the processors has its pros and cons. However, the main disadvantage of the Core 2 Quad Q6600 is its low clock frequency of 2.4 GHz. But this flaw can be corrected by overclocking, right? Let’s take a closer look at the processors available in our test lab and see if the quad-core Core 2 Quad Q6600 can operate at the same frequencies as the dual-core Core 2 Duo E6850 when overclocked.
recommendations
For overclocking experiments and performance measurement, we assembled a special test system, which, in addition to processors, included components specially designed for overclocking.
At the heart of our overclocking platform, we decided to use the new motherboard ASUS Blitz Extreme, aimed at enthusiastic gamers. This is the only motherboard on the market based on the Intel P35 Express chipset with DDR3 SDRAM support, which, thanks to an additional Crosslinx chip, offers support for Crossfire technology in the PCI Express x8 + PCI Express x8 scheme.
However, we were primarily interested in this motherboard due to its overclocking potential. It allows you to change the FSB frequency in the range from 200 to 800 MHz, provides access to all the FSB:DRAM multipliers available in the Intel P35, and has ample opportunities for changing voltages. Thus, the voltage on the processor can be increased up to 1.9 V, on the northbridge of the chipset — up to 2.03 V, on DDR3 memory — up to 3.04 V. In addition, the board has settings for changing the FSB Termination Voltage and PLL Voltage, which can be useful when overclocking processors with a significant increase in FSB frequency. Also, ASUS Blitz Extreme is able to please with the flexibility of configuring the memory controller, its capabilities in this respect are not inferior to ASUS P5K Deluxe.
ASUS engineers paid special attention to the processor power system. The board is equipped with an eight-channel CPU power converter assembled on high-frequency MOSFETs. In addition, the power stabilizer is able to please the Loadline Calibration function, which allows you to get rid of the Vdroop effect, which is unpleasant for overclockers — a voltage drop on the CPU with an increase in its load. Also, ASUS Blitz Extreme has another unique feature — a dual-channel memory voltage regulator, which should have a positive effect when overclocking DDR3 SDRAM.
It should be noted that ASUS Blitz Extreme also has other interesting features, in particular, an external SupremeFX II HD audio module, the ability to connect water cooling to the system for removing heat from the chipset, an additional diagnostic LCD screen, a large number of information LEDs on the board, and so on. However, all these «chips» will remain outside the scope of today’s review, since their influence on the overclocking characteristics of the board is minimal.
As RAM in our system, we used new DDR3 SDRAM modules from OCZ, capable of operating at frequencies up to 1800 MHz.
The OCZ DDR3 PC3-14400 Platinum Edition memory kit includes two modules with a capacity of 1 GB each, designed to operate at a frequency of 1800 MHz with 8-8-8-24 timings at a supply voltage of 1.95 V. It is quite natural that these modules are used in based on new gigabit DDR3 chips from Micron.
It should be noted that the full potential of the OCZ DDR3 PC3-14400 Platinum Edition is revealed at 450 MHz FSB and using the lowest FSB:DRAM divider for Intel P35 equal to 1:2. This fact allowed us to overclock test processors without looking back at the memory parameters.
We used the time-tested Scythe Infinity cooler to remove heat from the processor.
With a pair of high-speed (about 1900 RPM) 120mm fans (intake and exhaust) installed, this cooler can rightly be considered one of the most efficient air cooling systems.
Subscribe to our channel in Yandex.Zen or telegram channel @overclockers_news — these are convenient ways to follow new materials on the site. With pictures, extended descriptions and no ads.
Comparison of Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 and Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (105W)
Comparative analysis of the processors Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 and Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (105W) according to all known characteristics in the categories: General information, Performance, Compatibility, Security and reliability, Technology, Virtualization, Memory.
Analysis of processor performance by benchmarks: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark, Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core, 3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Intel Core 2 Duo E6850
versus
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (105W)
Advantages
Reasons to choose the Intel Core 2 Duo E6850
- 9000 about 22% more: 401 vs 330
TDP | 65 Watt vs 105 Watt |
Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 401 vs 330 |
Reasons to choose Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (105W)
- 2 more cores, the ability to run more applications at the same time: 4 vs 2 702
Number of cores | 4 vs 2 |
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 1019 vs 702 |
Benchmark comparison
CPU 1: Intel Core 2 Duo E6850
CPU 2: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (105W)
Geekbench 4 — Single Core |
|
|||
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core |
|
Name | Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 | Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (105W) |
---|---|---|
PassMark — Single thread mark | 1196 | |
PassMark — CPU mark | 1140 | |
Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 401 | 330 |
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 702 | 1019 |
3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score | 0 | |
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 0.522 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 24.255 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.138 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) | 0.748 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 3.829 |
Performance comparison
Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 | Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (105W) | |
---|---|---|
Architecture name | Conroe | Kentsfield |
Production date | Q3’07 | January 2007 |
Place in the ranking | 1939 | 2696 |
Processor Number | E6850 | Q6600 |
Series | Legacy Intel® Core™ Processors | Legacy Intel® Core™ Processors |
Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
Applicability | Desktop | Desktop |
Support 64 bit | ||
Base frequency | 3. 00 GHz | 2.40 GHz |
Bus Speed | 1333 MHz FSB | 1066 MHz FSB |
Crystal area | 143 mm2 | 286 mm2 |
Process | 65nm | 65nm |
Maximum core temperature | 72°C | B3=62.2°C; G0=71°C |
Number of cores | 2 | 4 |
Number of transistors | 291 million | 582 million |
Permissible core voltage | 0. 8500V-1.5V | 0.8500V-1.500V |
Level 1 cache | 256KB | |
Level 2 cache | 8192KB | |
Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 71 °C | |
Maximum frequency | 2.4 GHz | |
Low Halogen Options Available | ||
Package Size | 37.5mm x 37.5mm | 37.5mm x 37.5mm |
Supported sockets | PLGA775 | LGA775 |
Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 105 Watt |
Maximum number of processors per configuration | 1 | |
Execute Disable Bit (EDB) | ||
Intel® Trusted Execution Technology (TXT) | ||
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technology | ||
Parity FSB | ||
Idle States | ||
Intel 64 | ||
Intel® AES New Instructions | ||
Intel® Demand Based Switching | ||
Intel® Hyper-Threading Technology | ||
Intel® Turbo Boost Technology | ||
Thermal Monitoring | ||
Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x) | ||
Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |
Compare Intel Core2 Duo E7300 and Intel Core2 Duo E6750
Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing.
Tested on: CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining, CompuBench 1.5 Face detection, CompuBench 1.5 Ocean Surface Simulation, CompuBench 1.5 T-Rex, CompuBench 1.5 Video composition.
Core2 Duo E8300 | 0.0 of 10 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Core2 Duo E8400 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pentium G20 | 50254
How efficiently the processor uses electricity. Tested on: Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin, CompuBench 1.5 mining Face detection, CompuBench 1.5 Ocean Surface Simulation, CompuBench 1.5 T-Rex, CompuBench 1.5 Video composition, PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark, Geekbench 3 Multi-Core, PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core, Geekbench 3 AES Single Core, TDP.
Conroe Almighty: testing Core 2 Duo processorsAnd in order not to confirm the fears of numerous skeptics that the cores can «push elbows» with such an organization, the amount of cache memory has been increased to an incredible 4 MB. In addition, Core 2 Duo features the following technologies:
You should not think that the number 2 in the name of the new processor is just a marketing ploy — the new processors have indeed made a lot of improvements compared to the progenitor Core Duo. The most important here is the following: an increase in the speed of instruction execution, optimization of memory management, the introduction of support for 64-bit calculations, and, finally, a new set of SSE4 instructions. The result is greater efficiency even at the same clock frequency. And considering that desktop processors are not tasked with ensuring minimum power consumption and, therefore, higher frequencies can be used than those at which mobile processors operate, it is easy to guess that the Core 2 on the Conroe core noticeably outperforms the Core on the Yonah core. Speaking of energy consumption. This aspect of the «personal life» of the hero of our review also arouses considerable interest, because Intel engineers paid it, perhaps, no less attention than ensuring high performance. Let’s take a look at the most important points.
The result is the coldest dual-core processor available in desktop computers. Specification comparison
|