Athlon 64 X2 4800+ vs Core 2 Duo E6850
Aggregate performance score
Core 2 Duo E6850 outperforms Athlon 64 X2 4800+ by an impressive 67% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 and Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2701 | 2976 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Core 2 Duo (Desktop) | 2x Athlon 64 (Desktop) |
| Power efficiency | 1.05 | 0.63 |
| Architecture codename | Conroe (2006−2007) | Windsor (2006−2007) |
| Release date | no data | no data |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 and Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1333 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | 256K |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 512K |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | 220 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 291 million | 233 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 and Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | 775 | 939 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 and Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+. 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 Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 and Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | no data |
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.72 | 0.43 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
Core 2 Duo E6850 has a 67.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
The Core 2 Duo E6850 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E6850 and Athlon 64 X2 4800+, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
