A6-5345M vs Core 2 Extreme X6800

A6-5345M vs Core 2 Extreme X6800 Performance Spectrum

A6-5345M

2 / 2

1,122

+0.4%

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core 2 Extreme X6800

2 / 2

1,118

0.0%

Celeron U3600

Pentium T2370

Pentium T3400

Pentium Dual-Core E2200

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.

A6-5345M vs Core 2 Extreme X6800 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.

A6-5345M vs Core 2 Extreme X6800: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-5345M

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 17W instead of 75W, a 58W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 8410G, while Core 2 Extreme X6800 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

Core 2 Extreme X6800

2006

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,118 vs 1,122).
❌341.2% higher power demand at 75W vs 17W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A6-5345M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-5345M better than Core 2 Extreme X6800?

Yes. A6-5345M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 46 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.4% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A6-5345M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.2% more average FPS across 46 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A6-5345M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A6-5345M still makes the most sense overall. A6-5345M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 46 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

A6-5345M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2006) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A6-5345M vs Core 2 Extreme X6800 Technical Specifications

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

A6-5345M

The A6-5345M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FP2. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,122 points. Launch price was $70.

Core 2 Extreme X6800

The Core 2 Extreme X6800 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 July 2006 (19 years ago). It is based on the Conroe XE (2006) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.933 GHz, with boost up to 0.93 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 75 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,118 points. Launch price was $999.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A6-5345M and Core 2 Extreme X6800 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the A6-5345M versus 0.93 GHz on the Core 2 Extreme X6800 — a 100.3% clock advantage for the A6-5345M (base: 2.2 GHz vs 2.933 GHz). The A6-5345M uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Core 2 Extreme X6800 uses Conroe XE (2006) (65 nm). In PassMark, the A6-5345M scores 1,122 against the Core 2 Extreme X6800's 1,118 — a 0.4% lead for the A6-5345M. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A6-5345M	Core 2 Extreme X6800
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz+201%	0.93 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	2.933 GHz+33%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+12700%	4 MB (total)
Process	32 nm-51%	65 nm
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Conroe XE (2006)
PassMark	1,122	1,118
Geekbench 6 Single	250	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-5345M uses the FP2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Extreme X6800 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	A6-5345M	Core 2 Extreme X6800
Socket	FP2	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A6-5345M) / not specified (Core 2 Extreme X6800). The A6-5345M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 8410G), while the Core 2 Extreme X6800 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-5345M targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A6-5345M rivals Celeron 1005M.