Celeron 2957U vs Core 2 Quad Q6700

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.

Celeron 2957U 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.

Celeron 2957U 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.

Celeron 2957U

2014

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (10 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Haswell), while Core 2 Quad Q6700 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core 2 Quad Q6700 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,077 vs 2,092).
❌438.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 95W.

Core 2 Quad Q6700

2007

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 95W instead of 512W, a 417W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $530 MSRP, while Celeron 2957U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 2957U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core 2 Quad Q6700 better than Celeron 2957U?

Yes. Core 2 Quad Q6700 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.7% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core 2 Quad Q6700 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.8% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Quad Q6700 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core 2 Quad Q6700 is the better buy right now. Core 2 Quad Q6700 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $530 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (3.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron 2957U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2007). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 2957U vs Core 2 Quad Q6700 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 2957U

The Celeron 2957U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,077 points. Launch price was $107.

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

The Celeron 2957U packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Core 2 Quad Q6700 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.4 GHz on the Celeron 2957U versus 2.67 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q6700 — a 62.4% clock advantage for the Core 2 Quad Q6700 (base: 1.4 GHz vs 2.66 GHz). The Celeron 2957U uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 uses Kentsfield (2007) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2957U scores 2,077 against the Core 2 Quad Q6700's 2,092 — a 0.7% lead for the Core 2 Quad Q6700. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron 2957U vs 0 kB on the Core 2 Quad Q6700.

Feature	Celeron 2957U	Core 2 Quad Q6700
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	1.4 GHz	2.67 GHz+91%
Base Clock	1.4 GHz	2.66 GHz+90%
L3 Cache	2 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB	8 MB (total)+1500%
Process	22 nm-66%	65 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Kentsfield (2007)
PassMark	2,077	2,092
Geekbench 6 Single	284	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 2957U uses the FCBGA1168 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron 2957U versus DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Quad Q6700 — the Celeron 2957U supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 2957U 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: 10 (Celeron 2957U) vs 0 (Core 2 Quad Q6700) — the Celeron 2957U offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Wildcat Point-LP (Celeron 2957U) and P45,G45 (Core 2 Quad Q6700).

Feature	Celeron 2957U	Core 2 Quad Q6700
Socket	FCBGA1168	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600+100%	DDR2-800
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	10	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x virtualization. The Celeron 2957U includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Haswell)), while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 2957U targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2957U rivals Pentium 2117U.