Core 2 Quad Q6700 vs Celeron 2957U

Core 2 Quad Q6700

4 Cores4 Thrd95 WWMax: 2.67 GHz2007

Celeron 2957U

2 Cores2 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.4 GHz2014

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core 2 Quad Q6700

4 / 4

2,092

+0.7%

2,077

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Core 2 Quad Q6700 is positioned at rank 1079 and the Celeron 2957U is on rank 53, so the Celeron 2957U offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Quad Q6700

Ryzen 9 7950X

MSRP: $194|Avg: $20

78915%

Core i9-10900T

MSRP: $120|Avg: $5

74567%

Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE

MSRP: $423|Avg: $5

54142%

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85

16311%

Ryzen 9 9950X

MSRP: $649|Avg: $129

12920%

Ryzen 5 8400F

MSRP: $303|Avg: $55

11302%

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700

MSRP: $299|Avg: $60

6473%

Ryzen 5 2600X

MSRP: $229|Avg: $55

6389%

Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

5817%

#10

Core Ultra 5 245KF

MSRP: $294|Avg: $189

5817%

#11

Ryzen 5 5500

MSRP: $159|Avg: $85

5752%

#12

Ryzen 5 3600

MSRP: $199|Avg: $80

5596%

#13

Core i3-9100E

MSRP: $202|Avg: $30

5518%

#14

Core Ultra 5 245K

MSRP: $319|Avg: $200

5496%

#15

Core i3-8300T

MSRP: $138|Avg: $25

5446%

#1079

Core 2 Quad Q6700

MSRP: $530|Avg: $50

100%

#1080

Athlon 64 2600+

MSRP: $100|Avg: $5

99%

#1081

Celeron 2.20

MSRP: $79|Avg: $15

98%

#1082

Athlon 64 X2 5200+

MSRP: $420|Avg: $15

91%

#1083

Athlon 64 X2 4000+

MSRP: $328|Avg: $10

91%

#1084

Core i7-975

MSRP: $999|Avg: $50

89%

#1085

Athlon XP 2600+

MSRP: $98|Avg: $10

88%

#1086

Core i7-965

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $40

87%

#1087

Athlon 64 FX-74

MSRP: $499|Avg: $50

84%

#1088

Athlon 64 2000+

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

84%

#1089

Core 2 Extreme QX9770

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $1399

84%

#1090

Athlon 64 X2 5600+

MSRP: $505|Avg: $15

84%

#1091

Athlon 64 X2 5400+

MSRP: $485|Avg: $78

83%

#1092

Celeron 2.30

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

82%

#1093

Phenom X4 9450e

MSRP: $450|Avg: $430

82%

#1094

Athlon 64 X2 3800+

MSRP: $354|Avg: $20

78%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2957U

#13

Ryzen 3 210

MSRP: $99|Avg: $99

96%

#14

Ryzen 5 PRO 230

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

95%

#41

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

212%

#42

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

209%

#43

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

192%

#44

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

191%

#45

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

189%

#47

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

183%

#48

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

175%

#49

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

175%

#50

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

170%

#53

Celeron 2957U

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#65

Core i5-3320M

MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A

96%

#66

Core i7-4510U

MSRP: $393|Avg: N/A

95%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Celeron 2957U (2014) utilizes 22 nm technology and DDR3, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	Core 2 Quad Q6700	Celeron 2957U
Gaming	✅ Superior gaming performance	❌ Lower gaming performance
Workstation	✅ Better multi-core power	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($50)	✅ More affordable ($0)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Kentsfield (2007) / 65 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Haswell (2013−2015) / 22 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Core 2 Quad Q6700 (2007) relies on 65 nm technology and DDR1, DDR2, DDR3, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	Core 2 Quad Q6700	Celeron 2957U
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($50)	✅ More affordable ($0)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core 2 Quad Q6700 Benchmark Check

Celeron 2957U Benchmark Check

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core 2 Quad Q6700 and Celeron 2957U

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.

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.

⚡

Processing Power

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

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

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 2 Quad Q6700 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 2957U uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Quad Q6700 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron 2957U — the Celeron 2957U supports 40% 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 — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Core 2 Quad Q6700) vs 10 (Celeron 2957U) — the Celeron 2957U offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: P45,G45 (Core 2 Quad Q6700) and Wildcat Point-LP (Celeron 2957U).

Feature	Core 2 Quad Q6700	Celeron 2957U
Socket	LGA775	FCBGA1168
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	DDR3L-1600+50%
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	16 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	❌	❌
PCIe Lanes	0	10

🔧

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.