E2-3800 vs Core 2 Duo E6600

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo E6600
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.58
E2-3800
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
0.73
+25.9%

E2-3800 outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and E2-3800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28082677
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesCore 2 Duo (Desktop)AMD A-Series
Power efficiency0.844.61
Architecture codenameConroe (2006−2007)Kabini (2013−2014)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and E2-3800 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
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz1.3 GHz
Bus rate1066 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cacheno data2048 KB
Chip lithography65 nm28 nm
Die sizeno data107 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data90 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and E2-3800 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
Socketno dataFT3
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and E2-3800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI-+
FMA-FMA4
AVX-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and E2-3800 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and E2-3800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3-1600
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 8280
Number of pipelinesno data128
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and E2-3800 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and E2-3800 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and E2-3800.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

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
E2-3800 0.73
+25.9%

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
E2-3800 1152
+25.4%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Core 2 Duo E6600 263
+93.4%
E2-3800 136

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Core 2 Duo E6600 420
+8%
E2-3800 389

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
+7.3%
E2-3800 2295

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
+31.4%
E2-3800 3575

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
+17.8%
E2-3800 42.64

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
+5.5%
E2-3800 1

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
+13.6%
E2-3800 103

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
+121%
E2-3800 28

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
E2-3800 0.8
+365%

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
+5.6%
E2-3800 8

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
+19.6%
E2-3800 36

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
+21.8%
E2-3800 963

Geekbench 2

Core 2 Duo E6600 2898
+9.2%
E2-3800 2653

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.58 0.73
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 65 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

E2-3800 has a 25.9% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The E2-3800 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 E2-3800 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E6600 and E2-3800, 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
AMD E2-3800
E2-3800

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
3.2 104 votes

Rate E2-3800 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 E2-3800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.