Phenom X4 9100e vs Core 2 Duo E6850
Aggregate performance score
Phenom X4 9100e outperforms Core 2 Duo E6850 by a moderate 13% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 and Phenom X4 9100e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2702 | 2613 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Core 2 Duo (Desktop) | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.05 | 1.18 |
| Architecture codename | Conroe (2006−2007) | Agena (2007−2008) |
| Release date | no data | March 2008 (16 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 and Phenom X4 9100e 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 1.8 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1333 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | 285 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 291 million | 450 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 and Phenom X4 9100e 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 | AM2+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 and Phenom X4 9100e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 and Phenom X4 9100e are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 and Phenom X4 9100e. 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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.72 | 0.81 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
Phenom X4 9100e has a 12.5% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
The Phenom X4 9100e is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo E6850 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E6850 and Phenom X4 9100e, 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.
