Core 2 Duo E6850 vs Ryzen 7 7840S

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 7 7840S
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 35 Watt
16.13
+2080%

Ryzen 7 7840S outperforms Core 2 Duo E6850 by a whopping 2080% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 7 7840S and Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking4322665
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesPhoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040)Core 2 Duo (Desktop)
Power efficiency41.941.04
Architecture codenamePhoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023)Conroe (2006−2007)
Release date5 January 2023 (1 year ago)no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 7 7840S and Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads162
Base clock speed3.8 GHzno data
Boost clock speed5.1 GHz3 GHz
Bus rateno data1333 MHz
L1 cache512 KBno data
L2 cache8 MBno data
L3 cache16 MBno data
Chip lithography4 nm65 nm
Die size178 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 7 7840S and Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850 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.

SocketFP7/FP7r2/FP8no data
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 7840S and Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsRyzen AI, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SMEno data
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 7840S and Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6850. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon 780Mno 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.

Ryzen 7 7840S 16.13
+2080%
Core 2 Duo E6850 0.74

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.

Ryzen 7 7840S 24635
+2080%
Core 2 Duo E6850 1130

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Ryzen 7 7840S 7579
+148%
Core 2 Duo E6850 3057

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Ryzen 7 7840S 45931
+688%
Core 2 Duo E6850 5830

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.

Ryzen 7 7840S 14547
+447%
Core 2 Duo E6850 2661

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Ryzen 7 7840S 10.2
+400%
Core 2 Duo E6850 51

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.13 0.74
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 16 2
Chip lithography 4 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 65 Watt

Ryzen 7 7840S has a 2079.7% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, a 1525% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 7 7840S is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo E6850 in performance tests.

Be aware that Ryzen 7 7840S is a notebook processor while Core 2 Duo E6850 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 7840S and Core 2 Duo E6850, 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.


AMD Ryzen 7 7840S
Ryzen 7 7840S
Intel Core 2 Duo E6850
Core 2 Duo E6850

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.


5 7 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 7840S on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 73 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo E6850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 7 7840S or Core 2 Duo E6850, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.