Xeon X3380 vs Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W)
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) and Xeon X3380 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 2088 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Power efficiency | no data | 1.61 |
| Architecture codename | Kentsfield (2007) | no data |
| Release date | 23 July 2007 (17 years ago) | 1 January 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $266 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) and Xeon X3380 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | no data |
| Threads | 4 | no data |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.16 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 8 MB (shared) | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 12 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 2x 143 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 71 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 62 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 582 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 0.85V-1.3625V |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) and Xeon X3380 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 | no data |
| Socket | 775 | LGA775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) and Xeon X3380. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) and Xeon X3380 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) and Xeon X3380 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) and Xeon X3380. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) and Xeon X3380.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 23 July 2007 | 1 January 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
Xeon X3380 has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) and Xeon X3380. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) is a desktop processor while Xeon X3380 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) and Xeon X3380, 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.
