Celeron M 330 vs Core 2 Quad Q6600

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Celeron M 330 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2375not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesCore 2 Quad (Desktop)Celeron M
Power efficiency1.04no data
Architecture codenameKentsfield (2007)Banias (2003)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Celeron M 330 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads41
Base clock speedno data1.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz1.4 GHz
Bus rate1066 MHz400 MHz
L3 cacheno data512 KB L2
Chip lithography65 nm130 nm
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.356V

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Celeron M 330 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.

Socketno dataPPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)105 Watt24.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Celeron M 330. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAEno data32 Bit
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Celeron M 330 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad (Desktop) Q6600 and Celeron M 330 are enumerated here.

VT-xno data-

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 4 1
Threads 4 1
Chip lithography 65 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 105 Watt 24 Watt

Core 2 Quad Q6600 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron M 330, on the other hand, has 337.5% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Celeron M 330. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Core 2 Quad Q6600 is a desktop processor while Celeron M 330 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q6600 and Celeron M 330, 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 Quad Q6600
Core 2 Quad Q6600
Intel Celeron M 330
Celeron M 330

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.


3.8 1765 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q6600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2 1 vote

Rate Celeron M 330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q6600 or Celeron M 330, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.