Celeron M 440 vs Core 2 Quad Q6700
Aggregate performance score
Core 2 Quad Q6700 outperforms Celeron M 440 by a whopping 1100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Quad Q6700 and Celeron M 440 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2253 | 3360 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 1.31 | 0.39 |
| Architecture codename | Kentsfield (2007) | Yonah (2005−2006) |
| Release date | April 2007 (17 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Quad Q6700 and Celeron M 440 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.66 GHz | 1.86 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.67 GHz | 1.86 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1066 MHz | 533 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 8 MB (shared) | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 1 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 2x 143 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °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 | 0.85V-1.5V | 1.0V-1.3V |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad Q6700 and Celeron M 440 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 | LGA775 | PBGA479,PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 27 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q6700 and Celeron M 440. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | + | - |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | - |
| PAE | no data | 32 Bit |
| FSB parity | - | - |
Security technologies
Core 2 Quad Q6700 and Celeron M 440 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | - |
| EDB | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad Q6700 and Celeron M 440 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q6700 and Celeron M 440. 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 | 1.32 | 0.11 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 27 Watt |
Core 2 Quad Q6700 has a 1100% higher aggregate performance score, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
Celeron M 440, on the other hand, has 288.9% lower power consumption.
The Core 2 Quad Q6700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 440 in performance tests.
Note that Core 2 Quad Q6700 is a desktop processor while Celeron M 440 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q6700 and Celeron M 440, 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.
