Intel Core 2 Duo

[KamiQuazi]

Whats the main difference? I notice the Pentium D has 2 x 2m cache, as they C2D has 2m shared between the cores? I'm a converting AMD fan, so I need a little help deciding on a chip. Whats the hyperthredding with dual-cores?

KamiQuazi

Edited September 20, 2007 by KamiQuazi

[jcarle]

Pentium D, old generation.

Core 2 Duo, new generation.

Core 2 > Pentium.

'nuff said.

Edited September 20, 2007 by jcarle

[ripken204]

Pentium D, old generation.

Core 2 Duo, new generation.

Core 2 > Pentium.

'nuff said.

Core 2 >>>>>>>>>>>> Pentium

defiantly go for core 2

[aspenjim]

I too would like to know.... I sell lots of dell optiplex and started selling the C2D's, but don't exactly know the diference. Even today, I ordered a C2D E4500 2.2 for a Shuttle PC (for personal use). I see lot's of these various optiplex's and they all seem the same to me. Today I set up a 3.2 Pentium D. I have to admit that the 1.6 that I had side by side seemed every bit as quick. I tend to sell Pentium D's, because 3.2 gHz sounds much faster than 1.6's. I've sold 3 1.6's lately though.

A link to the differences would be nice. I've asked my Dell Rep and she doesn't know.

[ripken204]

well you dell rep is an id***. and clock speed means nothing anymore. just to a google search and you can find million of results. but you should just save your time and beleive us.

[jcarle]

well you dell rep is an id***. and clock speed means nothing anymore. just to a google search and you can find million of results. but you should just save your time and beleive us.

You couldn't be more wrong. Clock speed is VERY important. It's simply that the Core 2 infrastructure has been redesigned therefore increasing the effective data throughput for a same clock speed comparison. Clock speed is still very important and plays a vital role in performance. If you don't want people running around calling YOU an id***, I'd suggest you put more thought into your statements before you post them.

[ripken204]

well you dell rep is an id***. and clock speed means nothing anymore. just to a google search and you can find million of results. but you should just save your time and beleive us.

You couldn't be more wrong. Clock speed is VERY important. It's simply that the Core 2 infrastructure has been redesigned therefore increasing the effective data throughput for a same clock speed comparison. Clock speed is still very important and plays a vital role in performance. If you don't want people running around calling YOU an id***, I'd suggest you put more thought into your statements before you post them.

let me clarify then, clock speed when comparing different infrastructure is irrelevant. and you have to stop taking my posts out of context just for the sake of arguing.

[weEvil]

I'd wait for the new Core 2s if I were you. Yorkfield (quad version), and Wolfdale(dual core). They are made on the 45nm process. I think these should be released by Christmas time or early in 2008.

Either that or wait for AMDs Phenom processors. They are supposed to be pretty good. The server versions (code name Barcelona) are okay. They're coming in January 2008.

Different processor models have a different throughput per clock speed. No?

Like the old Athlons vs the Pentium 4s.

So in reality an Athlon 1.4 Ghz is =/= Pentium 4 1.4Ghz.

[KamiQuazi]

new core 2s, and new amd? where have I been? lol please explain the new amd to me

[jcarle]

let me clarify then, clock speed when comparing different infrastructure is irrelevant. and you have to stop taking my posts out of context just for the sake of arguing.

IT IS still relevant. It's simply not the only factor. Clock always has been and always will be relevant! EVEN when comparing different infrastructures.

And proof that you have no idea what the f*** you're talking about, as usual, the 3.2GHz Pentium D whacks the slower 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo... by your argument, the clock speed shouldn't matter. Just because it's a Core 2, by magic, it's supposed to be faster: http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.htm...2&chart=434

Edited September 21, 2007 by jcarle

[_Erik]

Well the slower core 2 duo you mentioned uitperforms the pentium D in several benchmarks. Doesn't the core 2 duo handle multithreaded tasks better then pentium D's?

[jcarle]

Well the slower core 2 duo you mentioned uitperforms the pentium D in several benchmarks. Doesn't the core 2 duo handle multithreaded tasks better then pentium D's?

Yes, the slower Core 2 does outperform the Pentium D in several areas. However, that wasn't the point I was trying to make. I was simply trying to illustrate that clock speed DOES have an influence and that it is NOT irrelevant.

The reason the Core 2 outperforms the Pentium D in most benchmarks is because of the optimizations brough to the new architecture, as well as the new instructions that were'nt available for the Pentium D. It's somewhat similar to the Pentium vs Pentium MMX debates back in the day. Core 2's contrast is somewhat similar. The optimizations provide a lot more punch per Hz however if you speed a Pentium D fast enough and slow a Core 2 down enough, the Core 2 optimizations won't be enough to supercede the Pentium D.

All this just to make the simple point that clock speed is not the only factor to consider, but clock speed DOES matter!

[TravisO]

Well the slower core 2 duo you mentioned uitperforms the pentium D in several benchmarks. Doesn't the core 2 duo handle multithreaded tasks better then pentium D's?

Stop being lazy and read for yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_2_duo

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amd#Current_and_future

The Intel Core 2 Duo is a little bit more expensive, but it's way faster, runs cooler and uses less watts, get one.

Core 2 Duos are the god of multi-threading, PentiumD's multi-threading support is a joke at best.

[Jeremy]

Stop being lazy and read for yourself

If everyone did that, we wouldn't have much of a forum.

[ripken204]

let me clarify then, clock speed when comparing different infrastructure is irrelevant. and you have to stop taking my posts out of context just for the sake of arguing.

IT IS still relevant. It's simply not the only factor. Clock always has been and always will be relevant! EVEN when comparing different infrastructures.

And proof that you have no idea what the f*** you're talking about, as usual, the 3.2GHz Pentium D whacks the slower 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo... by your argument, the clock speed shouldn't matter. Just because it's a Core 2, by magic, it's supposed to be faster: http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.htm...2&chart=434

i'm saying that you cant say a 3ghz p4 can beat a 3ghz c2d and you know thats what i mean