A6-3650 vs Core 2 Quad Q6700

CPU

GPU

A6-3650

4 Cores4 Thrd100 WWMax: 2.6 GHz2011

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Core 2 Quad Q6700

4 Cores4 Thrd95 WWMax: 2.67 GHz2007

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

A6-3650 vs Core 2 Quad Q6700 Performance Spectrum

A6-3650

4 / 4

2,098

+0.3%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core 2 Quad Q6700

4 / 4

2,092

0.0%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

A6-3650 vs Core 2 Quad Q6700 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A6-3650 vs Core 2 Quad Q6700: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A6-3650

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $415 less on MSRP ($115 MSRP vs $530 MSRP).
✅Delivers 362.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 18.2 vs 3.9 PassMark/$ ($115 MSRP vs $530 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6530D, while Core 2 Quad Q6700 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Core 2 Quad Q6700

2007

Why buy it

✅Draws 95W instead of 100W, a 5W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,092 vs 2,098).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 3.9 vs 18.2 PassMark/$ ($530 MSRP vs $115 MSRP).
❌No integrated graphics, while A6-3650 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A6-3650.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-3650 better than Core 2 Quad Q6700?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core 2 Quad Q6700 is ahead with a 1.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, A6-3650 pulls ahead with 0.3% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A6-3650 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

A6-3650 is the better buy right now. A6-3650 comes in $415 cheaper on MSRP at $115 MSRP versus $530 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.3% better PassMark. The compromise is that Core 2 Quad Q6700 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 362.2% better value on MSRP (18.2 vs 3.9 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

A6-3650 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2007) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A6-3650 vs Core 2 Quad Q6700 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A6-3650

The A6-3650 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 100 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,098 points. Launch price was $70.

Core 2 Quad Q6700

The Core 2 Quad Q6700 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Kentsfield (2007) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 2.67 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 8 MB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,092 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A6-3650 and Core 2 Quad Q6700 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the A6-3650 versus 2.67 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q6700 — a 2.7% clock advantage for the Core 2 Quad Q6700 (base: 2.6 GHz vs 2.66 GHz). The A6-3650 uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 uses Kentsfield (2007) (65 nm). In PassMark, the A6-3650 scores 2,098 against the Core 2 Quad Q6700's 2,092 — a 0.3% lead for the A6-3650. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A6-3650	Core 2 Quad Q6700
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz	2.67 GHz+3%
Base Clock	2.6 GHz	2.66 GHz+2%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	8 MB (total)+700%
Process	32 nm-51%	65 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Kentsfield (2007)
PassMark	2,098	2,092
Geekbench 6 Single	311	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-3650 uses the FM1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1866 on the A6-3650 versus DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Quad Q6700 — the A6-3650 supports 133.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A6-3650 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A6-3650) vs 0 (Core 2 Quad Q6700) — the A6-3650 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75 (A6-3650) and P45,G45 (Core 2 Quad Q6700).

Feature	A6-3650	Core 2 Quad Q6700
Socket	FM1	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866+133%	DDR2-800
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A6-3650) vs VT-x (Core 2 Quad Q6700). The A6-3650 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6530D), while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-3650 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: A6-3650 rivals Pentium G850.

Feature	A6-3650	Core 2 Quad Q6700
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Radeon HD 6530D	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	VT-x
Target Use	Budget Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the A6-3650 was priced at $115, while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 came in at $530. On launch pricing ($115 vs $530), A6-3650 was $415 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the A6-3650 delivers 18.2 pts/$ vs 3.9 pts/$ for the Core 2 Quad Q6700 — making the A6-3650 the 128.8% better value option.

Feature	A6-3650	Core 2 Quad Q6700
MSRP	$115-78%	$530
Performance per Dollar	18.2+367%	3.9
Release Date	2011	2007

Search A6-3650 on Amazon

Search Core 2 Quad Q6700 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.