The Comparison Between the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 and the Intel Core i3 530: A Look at Their Performance in Games

When it comes to choosing a CPU for a budget gaming system, there are many factors to consider. Two CPUs that have been around for a while are the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 and the Intel Core i3 530. While both processors have their own strengths and weaknesses, they were first introduced at different times and have distinct architectures. In this article, we'll take a closer look at these two CPUs and see how they perform in some popular games.

Let's start with the basics. The Q6600 is roughly 10% better than the i3 530, but it's worth remembering that the cost of other components can vary depending on where you live. In the UK, for example, you'll find 775 motherboards more commonly and less expensive than 1156 motherboards. However, this may differ in your location, which could ultimately sway your decision. When it comes to Cinebench tests, both single-threaded and multi-threaded performance, the Q6600 and i3 530 perform well.

In single-threaded performance, the Q6600 takes the lead with 38.77 points, while the i3 530 lags behind with 27.22 points. However, in multi-threaded performance, the i3 530's hyper-threading advantage gives it an edge, with a score of 96.76 to the Q6600's 91.54. These results are significant, as both processors were first-generation and are now iconic in their own right.

To put these results into perspective, we ran some tests using the GTX 1060 and 8GB of DDR3 RAM on both CPUs. We used the Gigabyte GA-G41 MTS2P motherboard with the Q6600 and the Intel DQ57TM motherboard with the i3 530. Our games were mostly for illustration purposes and were run from an i5-3450 system, but we included results from each processor.

First up was Overwatch, which we tested on both CPUs across various maps and a 1-hour gameplay period. The Q6600 averaged 37 frames per second (FPS) with 1080p and ultra settings, while the i3 530 lagged behind at 33 FPS. However, when it came to minimum FPS, the results were similar, with the Q6600 averaging 27 FPS and the i3 530 averaging 26 FPS.

Next up was Fallout 4, which we also tested on both CPUs with ultra settings at 1080p. The Q6600 averaged 48 FPS, while the i3 530 trailed behind at 45 FPS. However, in Rise of the Tomb Raider, a game that often favors newer processors, the i3 530 took the lead, averaging 40 FPS compared to the Q6600's 38 FPS.

Finally, we tested Far Cry Primal with ultra settings at 1080p. The results were almost even, with the Q6600 averaging 42 FPS and the i3 530 averaging 43 FPS. However, both CPUs exhibited some stuttering, which may be a concern for some users.

In terms of overclocking, we managed to hit 3.5GHz with the Q6600, while the i3 530 can be overclocked to 4GHz on stock settings if you're feeling brave enough. We stopped at 3.5GHz ourselves, as it was still a mixed bag of results.

In conclusion, both the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 and the Intel Core i3 530 have their strengths and weaknesses when it comes to gaming performance. While the Q6600 takes the lead in some tests, the i3 530's hyper-threading advantage gives it an edge in multi-threaded performance. When it comes to actual usage, both CPUs are capable of delivering smooth gameplay with the right GPU.

Ultimately, the choice between these two CPUs comes down to personal preference and budget constraints. If you're looking for a CPU that uses less power and doesn't get as hot, which would make it ideal for overclocking, then the i3 530 might be the better choice. However, if you want an iconic CPU with a strong single-threaded performance and are willing to pay a premium for it, then the Q6600 is still a great option.

The Winner: A Closer Look at the Results

It's not entirely clear who wins in this comparison, as both CPUs have their own strengths and weaknesses. The i3 530's hyper-threading advantage gives it an edge in multi-threaded performance, while the Q6600 takes the lead in single-threaded performance. However, when it comes to actual usage, both CPUs are capable of delivering smooth gameplay with the right GPU.

In terms of power consumption, the i3 530 uses less power than the Q6600, which would make it ideal for overclocking. However, if you're willing to pay a premium for an iconic CPU with strong single-threaded performance, then the Q6600 is still a great option.

Ultimately, the choice between these two CPUs comes down to personal preference and budget constraints. We hope this comparison has given you a better understanding of their strengths and weaknesses, and we encourage you to try out both processors in your own system before making a final decision.

"WEBVTTKind: captionsLanguage: enhello everyone and welcome to another video now whilst the first quad-core from Intel was the QX 6700 that officially launched under the core 2 extreme name under the core 2 quad Saito it was the Q 6600 first on the market 850 dollars when you it was expensive but thankfully it can now be picked up for around 15 and I'm still quite fond of it despite its age the first I 3 the 530 launched four years after the quad in January of 2010 for a more sensible price of around 117 dollars this can also be found now for around 15 as well and it features 2 cores 4 threads and a lower TDP we've reviewed both previously and found that they've still got some life left in them but if you're looking for a cheap CPU for a budget build and have $15 pounds or euros to spend on one of these 2 CPUs which one should it be well let's talk a little bit more about them and then run some tests on paper the Q 6600 is roughly 10% better than the i3 but it's worth remembering the cost of the other components - here in the UK you'll find 775 motherboards more commonly and less expensive than 1156 motherboards but that may differ where you live and could ultimately and immediately sway your decision in the Cinebench our tent STI threes single threaded performance blue the Q 6600 away with 38 77 227 82 but the multi-threaded performance gave the Q 6600 the edge with 96 76 to 91 54 both of these are iconic in the fact that they were both the first of a new generation and comparing them although largely just for fun could still be seen as relevant because I feel that these two have aged ok we're using the GTX 1060 and eight gigabytes of ddr3 for both tests today with the Core 2 quad running in the gigabyte GA g41 MTS 2p board and the i3 530 running in the DQ 57 TM board so let's get into the games the gameplay you see on screen today is mainly for illustrator purposes and was actually ran from the i-35 30 system but we will be including both the results from each processor on the screen so overwatch first and we tested the game on both CPUs on a variety of different maps and across our 1-hour gameplay period the cue 6600 averaged 37 fps with 1080p and ultra settings with the i3 getting ever so close but not quite keeping up at 33 the minimum fps returned a similar story with the core 2 quad pulling ahead ever so slightly but both set of results in both CPUs fared quite well fallout 4 next again with the ultra settings at 1080p to achieve 48 FPS with the cue 6600 again the i3 is slightly behind with 45 but it was a pretty close result and both of these CPUs you decent results despite both of them bottlenecking our card it goes to show though that if you have one of these processes and you are either wanting to upgrade it or you just wanted to pair it with a decent mid-range GPU then you shouldn't worry too much about doing so even though the card wouldn't be hitting its maximum potential next up we tried rise of the Tomb Raider and the i3 actually took the lead here once again we had the game set to 1080p with the high settings and the 530 so 40 FPS on average as opposed to the Q 60 635 it's interesting to note that the Q 6600 also demonstrated more stuttering - which is strange because as for physical cores as opposed to 2 and hyper-threading but the i3 and 1060 ran the game almost flawlessly finally its Far Cry primal ultra with the CPUs almost equally matched both sitting around 42 and 43 frames respectively with the i3 taking in lead once again on this one both exhibited some stutter but the overall experience was a pleasant one and both of these are still capable when paired with the right GPU as I mentioned we use the 1060 to ensure we were getting the maximum out of these two but if you're thinking about building a well balanced budget system something like the GTX 950 would work very well the winner here well it's not entirely clear the i3 is newer and thanks to hyper threading it still doesn't really struggle with games and the cue 6600 will always be the iconic quad and 775 motherboards are likely cheaper to buy and you'll find a lot of old systems online that have a 775 board inside as well this is location dependent no of course but I would take the i3 personally because it uses less power and doesn't get as hot which would make it ideal for overclocking speaking of which we managed to hit three gigahertz with the Q 6600 and the i3 530 can be overclocked to 4 gigahertz on the stock caller if you're feeling brave enough but we stopped at three point three and even then it was still a mixed bag of results so there we have it - in my opinion iconic CPUs paired against each other and to be honest the results were quite surprising and either one of these would make a pretty decent budget CPU for any low-cost gaming system this was a little bit of fun guys as always if you enjoyed the video leave a like down below if you didn't leave a dislike let me know your thoughts on both of these if you've had experiences with them as well and what you think and subscribe to the channel if you haven't done so already thank you so much for watching and I hope to see you all in the next onehello everyone and welcome to another video now whilst the first quad-core from Intel was the QX 6700 that officially launched under the core 2 extreme name under the core 2 quad Saito it was the Q 6600 first on the market 850 dollars when you it was expensive but thankfully it can now be picked up for around 15 and I'm still quite fond of it despite its age the first I 3 the 530 launched four years after the quad in January of 2010 for a more sensible price of around 117 dollars this can also be found now for around 15 as well and it features 2 cores 4 threads and a lower TDP we've reviewed both previously and found that they've still got some life left in them but if you're looking for a cheap CPU for a budget build and have $15 pounds or euros to spend on one of these 2 CPUs which one should it be well let's talk a little bit more about them and then run some tests on paper the Q 6600 is roughly 10% better than the i3 but it's worth remembering the cost of the other components - here in the UK you'll find 775 motherboards more commonly and less expensive than 1156 motherboards but that may differ where you live and could ultimately and immediately sway your decision in the Cinebench our tent STI threes single threaded performance blue the Q 6600 away with 38 77 227 82 but the multi-threaded performance gave the Q 6600 the edge with 96 76 to 91 54 both of these are iconic in the fact that they were both the first of a new generation and comparing them although largely just for fun could still be seen as relevant because I feel that these two have aged ok we're using the GTX 1060 and eight gigabytes of ddr3 for both tests today with the Core 2 quad running in the gigabyte GA g41 MTS 2p board and the i3 530 running in the DQ 57 TM board so let's get into the games the gameplay you see on screen today is mainly for illustrator purposes and was actually ran from the i-35 30 system but we will be including both the results from each processor on the screen so overwatch first and we tested the game on both CPUs on a variety of different maps and across our 1-hour gameplay period the cue 6600 averaged 37 fps with 1080p and ultra settings with the i3 getting ever so close but not quite keeping up at 33 the minimum fps returned a similar story with the core 2 quad pulling ahead ever so slightly but both set of results in both CPUs fared quite well fallout 4 next again with the ultra settings at 1080p to achieve 48 FPS with the cue 6600 again the i3 is slightly behind with 45 but it was a pretty close result and both of these CPUs you decent results despite both of them bottlenecking our card it goes to show though that if you have one of these processes and you are either wanting to upgrade it or you just wanted to pair it with a decent mid-range GPU then you shouldn't worry too much about doing so even though the card wouldn't be hitting its maximum potential next up we tried rise of the Tomb Raider and the i3 actually took the lead here once again we had the game set to 1080p with the high settings and the 530 so 40 FPS on average as opposed to the Q 60 635 it's interesting to note that the Q 6600 also demonstrated more stuttering - which is strange because as for physical cores as opposed to 2 and hyper-threading but the i3 and 1060 ran the game almost flawlessly finally its Far Cry primal ultra with the CPUs almost equally matched both sitting around 42 and 43 frames respectively with the i3 taking in lead once again on this one both exhibited some stutter but the overall experience was a pleasant one and both of these are still capable when paired with the right GPU as I mentioned we use the 1060 to ensure we were getting the maximum out of these two but if you're thinking about building a well balanced budget system something like the GTX 950 would work very well the winner here well it's not entirely clear the i3 is newer and thanks to hyper threading it still doesn't really struggle with games and the cue 6600 will always be the iconic quad and 775 motherboards are likely cheaper to buy and you'll find a lot of old systems online that have a 775 board inside as well this is location dependent no of course but I would take the i3 personally because it uses less power and doesn't get as hot which would make it ideal for overclocking speaking of which we managed to hit three gigahertz with the Q 6600 and the i3 530 can be overclocked to 4 gigahertz on the stock caller if you're feeling brave enough but we stopped at three point three and even then it was still a mixed bag of results so there we have it - in my opinion iconic CPUs paired against each other and to be honest the results were quite surprising and either one of these would make a pretty decent budget CPU for any low-cost gaming system this was a little bit of fun guys as always if you enjoyed the video leave a like down below if you didn't leave a dislike let me know your thoughts on both of these if you've had experiences with them as well and what you think and subscribe to the channel if you haven't done so already thank you so much for watching and I hope to see you all in the next one\n"