Core m3-6Y30 vs Core 2 Duo E6600

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo E6600
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.58
Core m3-6Y30
2015
2 cores / 4 threads, 4 Watt
1.37
+136%

Core m3-6Y30 outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by a whopping 136% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Core m3-6Y30 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28082232
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesCore 2 Duo (Desktop)Intel Core m3
Power efficiency0.8425.93
Architecture codenameConroe (2006−2007)Skylake-Y (2015)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)1 September 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$281

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Core m3-6Y30 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads24
Base clock speedno data0.9 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rate1066 MHz4 GT/s
Multiplierno data9
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data256 KB (per core)
L3 cacheno data4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm14 nm
Die sizeno data98.57 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistorsno data1750 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Core m3-6Y30 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
Socketno dataFCBGA1515
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt4.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Core m3-6Y30. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
My WiFino data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Smart Responseno data+

Security technologies

Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Core m3-6Y30 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Core m3-6Y30 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Core m3-6Y30. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data29.861 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics 515
Max video memoryno data16 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data850 MHz
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Core m3-6Y30 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
DVIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Core m3-6Y30 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2304@24Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data3840x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data3840x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over VGAno dataN/A

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Core m3-6Y30 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Core m3-6Y30.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data10

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Core 2 Duo E6600 0.58
m3-6Y30 1.37
+136%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Core 2 Duo E6600 919
m3-6Y30 2170
+136%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Core 2 Duo E6600 2462
m3-6Y30 3388
+37.6%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Core 2 Duo E6600 4698
m3-6Y30 7158
+52.4%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Core 2 Duo E6600 2052
m3-6Y30 2780
+35.5%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Core 2 Duo E6600 36.2
m3-6Y30 24.1
+50.2%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Core 2 Duo E6600 1
m3-6Y30 2
+68.9%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Core 2 Duo E6600 117
m3-6Y30 204
+74.4%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Core 2 Duo E6600 62
m3-6Y30 86
+37.9%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Core 2 Duo E6600 0.2
m3-6Y30 1.2
+606%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Core 2 Duo E6600 8
m3-6Y30 13
+67.9%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Core 2 Duo E6600 43
m3-6Y30 73
+70.3%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Core 2 Duo E6600 1173
m3-6Y30 1725
+47.1%

Geekbench 2

Core 2 Duo E6600 2898
m3-6Y30 5417
+86.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.58 1.37
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 4 Watt

m3-6Y30 has a 136.2% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more threads, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 1525% lower power consumption.

The Core m3-6Y30 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo E6600 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Duo E6600 is a desktop processor while Core m3-6Y30 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E6600 and Core m3-6Y30, 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.


Intel Core 2 Duo E6600
Core 2 Duo E6600
Intel Core m3-6Y30
Core m3-6Y30

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.


3.2 432 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo E6600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 73 votes

Rate Core m3-6Y30 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Duo E6600 or Core m3-6Y30, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.