Further Overclocking: 3D Game Performance
We’ll leave most of the gaming analysis up to you, but we do have a few observations to point out along the way. While absolute minimum FPS is included, remember that those data points alone might not be accurate due to Fraps' reporting mechanism.


We were able to push the Core 2 Duo E8400 high enough to play Crysis 3’s most demanding levels at the lowest details, matching the frame rates of a 2.83 GHz Core 2 Quad. Meanwhile, the tweaked Q9550 caught up to our Core i5 control, at least until we bumped things up to Very High quality settings.


Oddly, the Core 2 Quad Q9550 fails to pick up any additional performance in F1 2012, despite 300 MHz-higher clocks and a boost in memory bandwidth.


The overclocked Q9550 just about catches Core i3-3225 in Far Cry 3, and surpasses it in Hitman: Absolution.




This Core 2 Duo E8400 has enough headroom to catch Core i3-3225 in The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm. Interestingly, the old dual-core chip pulls into the lead once graphics quality is cranked up.



A maximum overclock on the E8400 was a necessity for smooth Ultimate-quality game play in the most CPU-demanding areas of Tomb Raider. Meanwhile, a tweaked Core 2 Quad surpasses Core i3-3225, although it still can't offer the sustained frame rates of a Core i5-3570K.

- Old Vs. New: Six Intel Processors, Benchmarked
- Test System Configuration And Benchmarks
- Results: Synthetics
- Results: Audio And Video
- Results: Adobe Creative Suite
- Results: Productivity
- Results: Compression
- Game Testing Methodology
- Results: Borderlands 2
- Results: Crysis 3
- Results: F1 2012
- Results: Far Cry 3
- Results: Hitman: Absolution
- Results: StarCraft II: Heart Of The Swarm
- Results: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
- Results: Tomb Raider
- Overclocking: More Voltage, Higher Clocks
- Overclocking: 3D Game Performance
- Power Consumption
- Performance Summary
- How Do Five-Year-Old CPUs Hold Up Against Ivy Bridge?
Also, amoralman, did you read this? It's basically assuring you that your C2D is still awesome as a budget processor.
Also holy crap on 1.45 vcore on the C2D
I find it shocking that my E6600(which I still hold in high regard, is far far worse than a 50 dollar Celeron. My mind is blown.
That said, today's quads have a more efficient and better architecture than those of yesteryear, and the 3570K is a popular choice for enthusiasts.
intel made all their leaps forward with this architecture, and killed AMD in the process. And has never really moved past it... 6 years on and it still stands toe to toe with the latest and greatest.
I'm not that surprised really.
i have both and the 3570k is significantly faster than an e6600, i always had problems with the e6600 not being fast enough for my taste, its a night and day difference between the 2