Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 Specs, Price, and FPS in Games
Build a PC
| 2 | 2 | 3.3 GHz |
| Cores | Threads | Base Frequency |
|---|
Geekbench 5 Single-Core
459
17%
Geekbench 5 Multi-Core
799
2%
Availability
Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 SLB9L 3.33GHz Processor 1333 CPU Socket 775 LGA775
Buy on Amazon
$83.23
In Stock
Updated 16 minutes ago
TOP 6 Games With Intel Core 2 Duo E8600
High
326
FPS
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
Very High
105
FPS
League of Legends
Ultra
142
FPS
Grand Theft Auto V
High
186
FPS
Valorant
High
208
FPS
Apex Legends
Best Looking
147
FPS
Dota 2
Specifications
| General | |
|---|---|
| Release Date | Aug 8th, 2008 |
| Segment | Desktop |
| Socket | Intel Socket 775 |
| Collection | Core 2 Duo |
| Codename | Wolfdale |
| Performance | |
|---|---|
| Cores | 2 |
| Threads | 2 |
| Base Frequency | 3. |
| Other | |
|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Overclockable | No |
| Integrated Graphics | None |
Find out which of the 2 CPUs performs better, view a side-by-side specification comparison.
Core 2 Duo E8600
$83.23
Ryzen 5 5500
$84.99
Core 2 Duo E8600
$83.23
Ryzen 5 3600
Core 2 Duo E8600
$83.23
Core i3-12100F
$89.98
Core 2 Duo E8600
$83.23
Ryzen 3 3200G
Core 2 Duo E8600
$83.23
Ryzen 3 3100
$85.99
Core 2 Duo E8600
$83.23
Core i7-3770K
Alternatives For Core 2 Duo E8600
Grand Theft Auto V, 1920 x 1080, Ultra
Intel Core i3-9100F155
FPS
$
0.4
/FPS
Intel Core i3-9100F Desktop Processor 4 Core Up to 4.2 GHz without Processor Graphics LGA1151 300 Series 65W
Buy on Amazon
$62
In Stock
Updated 17 minutes ago
Save $21.
23
Intel Core i7-3770150
FPS
$
0.43
/FPS
Intel Core i7-3770 Quad-Core Processor 3.4 GHz 4 Core LGA 1155 — BX80637I73770
Buy on Amazon
$65
In Stock
Updated 17 minutes ago
Save $18.23
AMD Athlon II X4 630139
FPS
$
0.13
/FPS
AMD Athlon II X4 630 2.8GHz Quad-Core CPU Processor ADX630WFK42GI Socket AM3 938pin
Buy on Amazon
$17.6
In Stock
Updated 16 minutes ago
Save $65.63
AMD A6-7400K142
FPS
$
0.32
/FPS
AMD AD740KYBJABOX A6-7400K Dual-Core 3.5 GHz Socket FM2+ Desktop Processor Radeon R5 Series
Buy on Amazon
$44.95
In Stock
Updated 16 minutes ago
Save $38.28
AMD Athlon 3000G150
FPS
$
0.55
/FPS
AMD Athlon 3000G 2-Core, 4-Thread Unlocked Desktop Processor with Radeon Graphics
Buy on Amazon
$82.42
In Stock
Updated 17 minutes ago
Save $0.81
Intel Core i3-7350K158
FPS
$
0.38
/FPS
Intel 7th Generation Core i3-7350K 4.20 GHz FCLGA1151 Desktop Processor (BX80677I37350K)
Buy on Amazon
$59.
99
In Stock
Updated 17 minutes ago
Save $23.24
AMD Phenom X4 9600136
FPS
$
0.29
/FPS
AMD Phenom X4 9600 2.3 GHz 2MB Quad-Core CPU Processor Socket AM2+
Buy on Amazon
$39.95
In Stock
Updated 16 minutes ago
Save $43.28
Intel Core i7-6700154
FPS
$
0.36
/FPS
Intel Boxed Core I7-6700 FC-LGA14C 3.40 GHz 8 M Processor Cache 4 LGA 1151 BX80662I76700
Buy on Amazon
$54.88
In Stock
Updated 17 minutes ago
Save $28.35
Intel Core i3-8100153
FPS
$
0.39
/FPS
Intel Core i3-8100 Desktop Processor 4 Cores up to 3.6 GHz Turbo Unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W
Buy on Amazon
$60
In Stock
Updated 17 minutes ago
Save $23.23
Intel Pentium G4560150
FPS
$
0.23
/FPS
Intel Pentium G4560 — 3.5 GHz — 2 cores — 4 threads — 3 MB cache — LGA1151 Socket — Box
Buy on Amazon
$33.98
In Stock
Updated 17 minutes ago
Save $49.25
Refine results to filter 1678 processors by performance, release date, price, and value.
Click on a CPU to view more in-depth specifications and game FPS.
Calculation Parameters
Graphics Card
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Graphics Preset
Advanced Graphics
Game Mode
Singleplayer
Sort By
Popularity
Filters
Performance Rating
Value Rating
CPU Type
Desktop
25
Mobile
0
Server
0
Found 1678 CPUs.
Popularity
Processor
Performance
Ryzen 5 5600X
Nov 5th, 2020
Performance Rating
$148.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 7 5800X3D
Apr 20th, 2022
Performance Rating
$289.27 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i9-13900K
Sep 27th, 2022
Performance Rating
$569.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 7 5700G
Apr 13th, 2021
Performance Rating
$167.9 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 5 5500
Apr 4th, 2022
Performance Rating
$84.
99 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 7 5800X
Nov 5th, 2020
Performance Rating
$223.77 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 5 5600G
Apr 13th, 2021
Performance Rating
$121.66 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 5 5600
Apr 20th, 2022
Performance Rating
$129.38 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 7 5700X
Apr 4th, 2022
Performance Rating
$190.11 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i9-12900
Jan 4th, 2022
Performance Rating
$1,279.08 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 9 5900X
Nov 5th, 2020
Performance Rating
$310.11 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 9 7900X
Sep 27th, 2022
Performance Rating
$361.1 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i7-13700K
Sep 27th, 2022
Performance Rating
$407.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i7-12700K
Nov 4th, 2021
Performance Rating
$319 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 7 7700X
Sep 27th, 2022
Performance Rating
$299 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i5-13600K
Sep 27th, 2022
Performance Rating
$309.
99 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i5-12600K
Nov 4th, 2021
Performance Rating
$223.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i5-13600KF
Sep 27th, 2022
Performance Rating
$259.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 5 3600
Jul 7th, 2019
Performance Rating
$89 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 5 7600X
Sep 27th, 2022
Performance Rating
$241.83 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i9-13900KF
Sep 27th, 2022
Performance Rating
$546.52 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i9-12900K
Nov 4th, 2021
Performance Rating
$398.5 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i7-12700KF
Nov 4th, 2021
Performance Rating
$274.21 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 9 5950X
Nov 5th, 2020
Performance Rating
$454.36 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i3-12100F
Jan 29th, 2022
Performance Rating
$89.
98 on Amazon
In Stock
- Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- …
- 66
- 67
- 68
- Next
Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 vs Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 Benchmarks, Specs, Performance Comparison and Differences
|
|
|
|
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 vs Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.
Specification comparison:
| Processor | Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 | Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 | ||||||
| Market (main) | Desktop | Desktop | ||||||
| ISA | x86-64 (64 bit) | x86-64 (64 bit) | ||||||
| Microarchitecture | Penryn | Penryn | ||||||
| Core name | Wolfdale | Yorkfield | ||||||
| Family | Core 2 Duo 8000 | Core 2 Quad 9000 | ||||||
| Part number(s), S-Spec |
BX80570E8600, |
BX80569Q9650, |
||||||
| Release date | Q3 2008 | Q3 2008 | ||||||
| Lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm | ||||||
| Transistors | 410. 000.000 |
820.000.000 | ||||||
| Cores | 2 | 4 | ||||||
| Threads | 2 | 4 | ||||||
| Base frequency | 3,3 GHz | 3,0 GHz | ||||||
| Turbo frequency | — | — | ||||||
| High performance cores |
— |
4 Cores 4 Threads @ 3,0 GHz |
||||||
| Cache memory | 6 MB | 12 MB | ||||||
| Max memory capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB | ||||||
| Memory types |
DDR2-800 |
DDR3-1333 |
||||||
| Max PCIe lanes | 16 | 16 | ||||||
| TDP | 65 W | 95 W | ||||||
| Suggested PSU | 600W ATX Power Supply | 600W ATX Power Supply | ||||||
| GPU integrated graphics | None | None | ||||||
| Socket | LGA775 | LGA775 | ||||||
| Compatible motherboard | Socket LGA 775 Motherboard | Socket LGA 775 Motherboard | ||||||
| Maximum temperature | 72. 4°C |
71.4°C | ||||||
| Security |
— |
Trusted Execution Technology, |
||||||
| CPU-Z single thread | 265 | 257 | ||||||
| CPU-Z multi thread | 547 | 940 | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 single thread | 101 | 86 | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 multi-thread | 178 | 337 | ||||||
| Cinebench R20 single thread | 199 | 180 | ||||||
| Cinebench R20 multi-thread | 352 | 717 | ||||||
| Cinebench R23 single thread | 490 | 450 | ||||||
| Cinebench R23 multi-thread | 868 | 1. 744 |
||||||
| PassMark single thread | 1.388 | 1.281 | ||||||
| PassMark CPU Mark | 1.319 | 2.368 | ||||||
| (Windows) Geekbench 4 single core |
2.110 | 2.162 | ||||||
| (Windows) Geekbench 4 multi-core |
3.470 | 6.263 | ||||||
| (SGEMM) GFLOPS performance |
36,1 GFLOPS | 73,64 GFLOPS | ||||||
| (Multi-core / watt performance) Performance / watt ratio |
53 pts / W | 66 pts / W | ||||||
| Amazon | ||||||||
| eBay |
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
Suggested PSU: We assume that we have An ATX computer case, a high end graphics card, 16GB RAM, a 512GB SSD, a 1TB HDD hard drive, a Blu-Ray drive. We will have to rely on a more powerful power supply if we want to have several graphics cards, several monitors, more memory, etc.
Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.
The processor Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 has a larger number of cores, the maximum frequency of Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 is greater, that the PDT of Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 is lower. Both were produced in the same year.
Performance comparison with the benchmarks:
Performance comparison between the two processors, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark software such as Geekbench.
| CPU-Z — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 |
257 940 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 |
265 547 |
In single core, the difference is 3%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 72%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
| Cinebench R15 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 |
86 337 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 |
101 178 |
In single core, the difference is 17%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 89%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
| Cinebench R20 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 |
180 717 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 |
199 352 |
In single core, the difference is 11%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 104%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
| Cinebench R23 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 |
450 1.744 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 |
490 868 |
In single core, the difference is 9%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 101%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
| PassMark — CPU Mark & single thread | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 |
1.281 2.368 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 |
1.388 1.319 |
In single core, the difference is 8%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 80%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
On Windows:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Windows | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 |
2.162 6.263 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 |
2.110 3.470 |
In single core, the difference is 2%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 80%.
On Linux:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 |
2.  6777.789 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 |
2.130 3.713 |
In single core, the difference is 26%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 110%.
On Mac OS X:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Mac OS X | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 |
2.101 6.147 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 |
2.123 3.563 |
In single core, the difference is 1%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 73%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
This allows us to better visualize the respective power of these devices. For each result, we took an average of 250 values on the famous benchmark software.
Equivalence:
Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 AMD equivalentIntel Core 2 Quad Q9650 AMD equivalent
Intel Core2 Quad Q9500 or Intel Core2 Duo E8600
- 003 Intel Core2 Quad Q9500 vs Intel Core2 Duo E8600
Family
- Core2 Quad Q9505
Compare - Core2 Quad Q9550
Compare - Core2 Quad Q9650
Compare
Family
- Core2 Duo E8200
Compare - Core2 Duo E8300
Compare - Core2 Duo E8400
Compare - Core2 Duo E8500
Compare
Game Speed
Core2 Quad Q9500
35.3 (+9%)
Core2 Duo E8600
32.3
Performance in games and similar applications, according to our tests.
The performance of 4 cores, if any, and performance per core have the greatest impact on the result, since most games do not fully use more than 4 cores.
The speed of caches and working with RAM is also important.
Speed in office use
Core2 Quad Q9500
37.6
Core2 Duo E8600
37.6
Performance in everyday work such as browsers and office programs.
The performance of 1 core has the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications use only one, ignoring the rest.
Similarly, many professional applications such as various CADs ignore multi-threaded performance.
Speed in heavy applications
Core2 Quad Q9500
19.4 (+17%)
Core2 Duo E8600
16.6
loading a maximum of 8 cores.
The performance of all cores and their number has the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications willingly use all the cores and increase the speed accordingly.
At the same time, certain periods of work can be demanding on the performance of one or two cores, for example, applying filters in the editor.
Price
The data is obtained from tests by users who tested their systems with and without overclocking. Thus, you see the average values corresponding to the processor.
Speed of numerical operations
Simple household tasks |
|
Core2 Quad Q9500 30.9 Core2 Duo E8600 33.1 (+7%) |
Demanding games and tasks |
|
Core2 Quad Q9500 13.2 (+74%) Core2 Duo E8600 7.6 |
Extreme |
|
Core2 Quad Q9500 2. Core2 Duo E8600 1.5 |
7 (+80%) Different tasks require different CPU strengths. A system with few fast cores and low memory latency will be fine for the vast majority of games, but will be inferior to a system with a lot of slow cores in a rendering scenario.
We believe that a minimum of 4/4 (4 physical cores and 4 threads) processor is suitable for a budget gaming PC. At the same time, some games can load it at 100%, slow down and freeze, and performing any tasks in the background will lead to a drop in FPS.
Ideally, the budget shopper should aim for a minimum of 4/8 and 6/6. A gamer with a big budget can choose between 6/12, 8/8 and 8/16. Processors with 10 and 12 cores can perform well in games with high frequency and fast memory, but are overkill for such tasks. Also, buying for the future is a dubious undertaking, since in a few years many slow cores may not provide sufficient gaming performance.
When choosing a processor for your work, consider how many cores your programs use. For example, photo and video editors can use 1-2 cores when working with filtering, and rendering or converting in the same editors already uses all threads.
Data obtained from tests by users who tested their systems both with overclocking (maximum value in the table) and without (minimum). A typical result is shown in the middle, the more filled in the color bar, the better the average result among all tested systems.
Benchmarks
Benchmarks were run on stock hardware, that is, without overclocking and with factory settings. Therefore, on overclocked systems, the points can noticeably differ upwards. Also, small performance changes may be due to the BIOS version.
Passmark
Intel Core2 Quad Q9500
2189 (+59%)
Intel Core2 Duo E8600
1373
Features
Main
Socket Installed in motherboards with a suitable socket. Note that a socket is not guaranteed to be compatible. The manufacturer may not add support to the BIOS. |
LGA 775 | |
| Manufacturer Firm | Intel | Intel |
| Code name for the Microarchitecture family. | Yorkfield | Wolfdale |
Performance
| Cores The total number of physical cores. | 4 | 2 |
| ThreadsNumber of threads. The number of logical processor cores that the operating system sees. | 4 | 2 |
Multi-Threading Technology With Intel’s Hyper-threading and AMD’s SMT technology, one physical core is recognized as two logical cores by the operating system, thereby increasing processor performance in multi-threaded applications. |
Missing | Missing |
| Base frequencyThe guaranteed frequency of all cores (P-cores in the case of the corresponding architecture) of the processor at maximum load. It is important to remember that speed and frequency are not directly related. For example, a new processor at a lower frequency may be faster than an old one at a higher one. | 2.83 GHz | 3.33 GHz |
| TDPThermal Design Power is an indicator that determines heat dissipation in standard operation. The cooler or water cooling system must be rated for a larger value. Remember that with a factory bus or manual overclocking, TDP increases significantly. | 95W | 65 W |
Cache and RAM
Video core
PCI
Details
Model Official name. |
Q9500 | E8600 |
| ArchitectureCode name for the microarchitecture generation. | Yorkfield | Wolfdale |
| Process The manufacturing process, measured in nanometers. The smaller the technical process, the more perfect the technology, the lower the heat dissipation and power consumption. For Ryzen with a chiplet layout, the CCD process is implied. | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| DescriptionInformation about the processor, taken from the official website of the manufacturer. | Intel® Core™2 Quad Processor Q9500 (6M Cache, 2.83 GHz, 1333 MHz FSB) | Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor E8600 (6M Cache, 3.33 GHz, 1333 MHz FSB) |
| Instructions | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Bus frequency The speed of communication with the system. |
1333 MHz FSB | 1333 MHz FSB |
Which is better
Intel Core2 Quad Q9500
- On average, gaming performance is 9% better.
- The speed of work in office applications and browsers is increased by 74%.
- In complex multi-threaded applications, faster and outperforms by 80%.
- The number of physical cores is 2 more.
- The number of threads is 2 more.
- TDP is 32% lower
Your comment can be here
Comparative analysis of Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300 and Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 processors by all known characteristics in the categories: General information, Performance, Memory, Compatibility, Security and reliability, Technologies, Virtualization.
Analysis of processor performance by benchmarks: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark, Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core, 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 Quad Q8300
versus
Intel Core 2 Duo E8600
Benefits
Reasons to choose Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300
- Newer processor, 3 month(s) difference in release dates
- 2 more cores, the ability to run more applications at the same time: 4 vs 2
- The L1 cache is 4 times larger, which means more data can be stored in it for quick access
- Performance in the PassMark benchmark — CPU mark is about 36% higher: 1869vs 1373
- About 33% more performance in Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core benchmark: 1061 vs 798
- About 46% more performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s): 0.538 vs 0.368 900 04
- Performance about 24% more performance in CompuBench 1.
5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) benchmark: 0.135 vs 0.109 - CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) about 60% more performance: 1.117 vs 0.7
- Performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) about 50% higher: 3.999 vs 2.67
| Release date | November 2008 vs August 2008 |
| Number of cores | 4 vs 2 |
| Level 1 cache | 256 KB vs 64 KB |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 1869 vs 1373 |
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 1061 vs 798 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 0. 538 vs 0.368 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.135 vs 0.109 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) | 1.117 vs 0.7 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 3.999 vs 2.67 |
Reasons to choose Intel Core 2 Duo E8600
- About 33% more clock speed: 3.33 GHz vs 2.5 GHz
- About 1% more maximum core temperature: 72.4°C vs 71.4°C
- About 46% less power consumption: 65 Watt vs 95 Watt
- PassMark — Single thread mark performance about 32% more: 1402 vs 1060
- About 39% more Geekbench 4 — Single Core performance: 468 vs 337
- About 74% more CompuBench 1.
5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) performance: 27.856 vs 15.964
9000 5 L2 cache approx. 50% more means more data can be stored in it for quick access
| Maximum frequency | 3.33GHz vs 2.5GHz |
| Maximum core temperature | 72.4°C vs 71.4°C |
| Level 2 cache | 6144 KB vs 4096 KB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt vs 95 Watt |
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 1402 vs 1060 |
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 468 vs 337 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 27.856 vs 15.964 |
Benchmark comparison
CPU 1: Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300
CPU 2: Intel Core 2 Duo E8600
| PassMark — Single thread mark |
|
|||||
| PassMark — CPU mark |
|
|||||
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core |
|
|||||
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core |
|
|||||
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..png) 5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
| Name | Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300 | Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 1060 | 1402 |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 1869 | 1373 |
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 337 | 468 |
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 1061 | 798 |
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
0.538 | 0.368 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 15.964 | 27.856 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.135 | 0.109 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) | 1.117 | 0.7 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 3.999 | 2.67 |
Feature comparison
| Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300 | Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 | |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture name | Yorkfield | Wolfdale |
| Production date | November 2008 | August 2008 |
| Ranking | 2873 | 2741 |
| Price now | $49. 99 |
$49.99 |
| Processor Number | Q8300 | E8600 |
| Series | Legacy Intel® Core™ Processors | Legacy Intel® Core™ Processors |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| Price/performance ratio (0-100) | 17.60 | 14.21 |
| Applicability | Desktop | Desktop |
| Support 64 bit | ||
| Base frequency | 2. 50 GHz |
3.33 GHz |
| Bus Speed | 1333 MHz FSB | 1333 MHz FSB |
| Crystal area | 164 mm2 | 107 mm2 |
| Level 1 cache | 256KB | 64KB |
| Level 2 cache | 4096KB | 6144KB |
| Process | 45nm | 45nm |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 71 °C | 72 °C |
| Maximum core temperature | 71. 4°C |
72.4°C |
| Maximum frequency | 2.5GHz | 3.33 GHz |
| Number of cores | 4 | 2 |
| Number of transistors | 456 million | 410 million |
| Permissible core voltage | 0.8500V-1.3625V | 0.8500V-1.3625V |
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |
| Low Halogen Options Available | ||
| Maximum number of processors in configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Package Size | 37.
|