Core 2 Quad Q7600 vs Athlon II X2 255

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II X2 255 and Core 2 Quad Q7600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2664not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.08no data
Architecture codenameRegor (2009−2013)Yorkfield (2007−2009)
Release date25 January 2010 (14 years ago)31 August 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$60no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon II X2 255 and Core 2 Quad Q7600 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed3.1 GHz2.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz2.7 GHz
L1 cache128 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB2 MB (shared)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm45 nm
Die size117 mm22x 82 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data71 °C
Number of transistors410 million456 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II X2 255 and Core 2 Quad Q7600 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketAM3775
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X2 255 and Core 2 Quad Q7600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II X2 255 and Core 2 Quad Q7600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II X2 255 and Core 2 Quad Q7600.

PCIe version2.02.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 25 January 2010 31 August 2009
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 95 Watt

Athlon II X2 255 has an age advantage of 4 months, and 46.2% lower power consumption.

Core 2 Quad Q7600, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

We couldn't decide between Athlon II X2 255 and Core 2 Quad Q7600. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X2 255 and Core 2 Quad Q7600, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

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


AMD Athlon II X2 255
Athlon II X2 255
Intel Core 2 Quad Q7600
Core 2 Quad Q7600

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

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


3.3 175 votes

Rate Athlon II X2 255 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 27 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q7600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon II X2 255 or Core 2 Quad Q7600, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.