AMD Phenom X4 9950 BE (140W) vs Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W)

Comparative analysis of AMD Phenom X4 9950 BE (140W) and Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W) processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Compatibility, Virtualization, Memory. Benchmark processor performance analysis: CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).

AMD Phenom X4 9950 BE (140W)

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W)

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Phenom X4 9950 BE (140W)

CPU is newer: launch date 7 month(s) later
Processor is unlocked, an unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Around 8% higher clock speed: 2.6 GHz vs 2.4 GHz
2x more L1 cache, more data can be stored in the L1 cache for quick access later
6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 3.118 vs 0.522
Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.162 vs 0.138

Specifications (specs)
Launch date	March 2008 vs July 2007
Unlocked	Unlocked vs Locked
Maximum frequency	2.6 GHz vs 2.4 GHz
L1 cache	128 KB (per core) vs 256 KB
Benchmarks
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	3.118 vs 0.522
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	0.162 vs 0.138

Reasons to consider the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W)

4x more L2 cache, more data can be stored in the L2 cache for quick access later
Around 47% lower typical power consumption: 95 Watt vs 140 Watt
3.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 24.255 vs 6.836
2.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 0.748 vs 0.298
Around 10% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 3.829 vs 3.494

Specifications (specs)
L2 cache	8192 KB vs 512 KB (per core)
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	95 Watt vs 140 Watt
Benchmarks
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	24.255 vs 6.836
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	0.748 vs 0.298
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	3.829 vs 3.494

Compare benchmarks

CPU 1: AMD Phenom X4 9950 BE (140W)
CPU 2: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W)

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)

CPU 1

CPU 2

3.118

0.522

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)

CPU 1

CPU 2

6.836

24.255

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)

CPU 1

CPU 2

0.162

0.138

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)

CPU 1

CPU 2

0.298

0.748

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

CPU 1

CPU 2

3.494

3.829

Name	AMD Phenom X4 9950 BE (140W)	Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W)
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	3.118	0.522
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	6.836	24.255
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	0.162	0.138
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	0.298	0.748
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	3.494	3.829

Compare specifications (specs)

	AMD Phenom X4 9950 BE (140W)	Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (95W)
Essentials
Architecture codename	Agena	Kentsfield
Launch date	March 2008	July 2007
Place in performance rating	3295	3296
Vertical segment	Desktop	Desktop
Performance
64 bit support
Die size	285 mm	2x 143 mm
L1 cache	128 KB (per core)	256 KB
L2 cache	512 KB (per core)	8192 KB
L3 cache	2048 KB (shared)
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	65 nm
Maximum frequency	2.6 GHz	2.4 GHz
Number of cores	4	4
Transistor count	450 million	582 million
Unlocked
Maximum case temperature (TCase)		62 °C
Compatibility
Max number of CPUs in a configuration	1	1
Sockets supported	AM2+	775
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	140 Watt	95 Watt
Virtualization
AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™)
Memory
Supported memory types		DDR1, DDR2, DDR3