Question on processors

[ZMan2k2]

So, I'm looking for a new laptop, and I haven't been paying much attention to all the developments over the past 4 years. I've heard of "dual-core" processors, but now that looking, it seems that they are everywhere. When I read about them, there are all kinds, from 1.5Gz, to 2.2Gz dual core. Does this mean that there are "two 1.5Gz" processors, so equivalent to a 3Gz? I'm used to the 2.8Gz processor that I have now, so will I see a performance difference? I know that for what I use the PC for, net surfing, music, documents, I don't need a massive gaming system. So would I need the larger 2.2Gz processor to be equivalent to my present CPU, or would the 1.5Gz be equal, or not really noticeable difference?

[A790]

You will notice a substantial difference between a 1.5ghz dual core and a P4 3.0GHZ. The reason for this is because two cores can handle two different tasks at once, whereas a single core can only handle one.

A 1.5ghz dual core will be faster than your present 2.8 ghz for multitasking (web browing, steaming video/music, and working with excel, for example). Of course, getting a larger processor adds to the longevity of your system.

[The Cosworth]

Originally posted by A790
You will notice a substantial difference between a 1.5ghz dual core and a P4 3.0GHZ. The reason for this is because two cores can handle two different tasks at once, whereas a single core can only handle one.

A 1.5ghz dual core will be faster than your present 2.8 ghz for multitasking (web browing, steaming video/music, and working with excel, for example). Of course, getting a larger processor adds to the longevity of your system.

completely correct,

also a good thing to mention is that Quads are slowly starting to trickle in, so getting a lower rung dual will mean once the quads break through you will be even more behind again.

I would spend the coin on a decent dual or wait until the quads come up and are a little more mobile friendly

[dj_rice]

Good info....sorry to thread hijack...but I am confused with this Core Duo and Core 2 Duo....?

[Kavy]

Think of it as Diet Coke and Coke Zero.

In many ways Core 2 is the same as Core: The chips are built using the same production process and fit in the same sockets as Core Duo chips. Putting aside Core 2 Extreme (a fancy version of the Core 2 Duo), you won't see many spec changes: However Core Duos have the same frontside bus speed of 667MHz, but Core 2 Duo is now available at 800MHz and somewhat faster clock speeds (as I write this, 2.67GHz chips are available). The frontside bus communicates between the CPU and RAM (and other components), and it's a notorious performance bottleneck for computers. The Core 2 also has the same L2 cache that the Core has. it cam however come in a 4M options instead of a 2M option. However, there are architecture changes to the silicon that give the Core 2 more sophisticated processing abilities.

Long and short, a Core 2 Duo is about 30% faster across the board as a same speed Core Duo, 50% faster if you have a new Santa Rosa Core and the 800Mhz Bus speed.

[dj_rice]

Originally posted by Kavy
Think of it as Diet Coke and Coke Zero.

In many ways Core 2 is the same as Core: The chips are built using the same production process and fit in the same sockets as Core Duo chips. Putting aside Core 2 Extreme (a fancy version of the Core 2 Duo), you won't see many spec changes: However Core Duos have the same frontside bus speed of 667MHz, but Core 2 Duo is now available at 800MHz and somewhat faster clock speeds (as I write this, 2.67GHz chips are available). The frontside bus communicates between the CPU and RAM (and other components), and it's a notorious performance bottleneck for computers. The Core 2 also has the same L2 cache that the Core has. it cam however come in a 4M options instead of a 2M option. However, there are architecture changes to the silicon that give the Core 2 more sophisticated processing abilities.

Long and short, a Core 2 Duo is about 30% faster across the board as a same speed Core Duo, 50% faster if you have a new Santa Rosa Core and the 800Mhz Bus speed.


Thank you for clearing that up :thumbsup: :thumbsup:, I just went to Futureshops website..and seen some computers labelled dual core.....are these older than the core duo?

[The Cosworth]

Originally posted by dj_rice



Thank you for clearing that up :thumbsup: :thumbsup:, I just went to Futureshops website..and seen some computers labelled dual core.....are these older than the core duo?

I would think that dual core would just be a branding they put on so people can say to their other buddies... haha look I have dual core.


If you look on the actual specs it will either say CoreDuo or Core2Duo (or C2D) if not then either it isn't an Intel chip or they aren't labeling their crap properly (which I wouldn't put it past FF/BB) and hence why I hate them

[Biga Ramrod]

Since you guys mentioned a release of the quad core, do you have any idea when it might be readily available for laptops? So far I have only seen them available for desktops.

[The Cosworth]

Originally posted by Biga Ramrod
Since you guys mentioned a release of the quad core, do you have any idea when it might be readily available for laptops? So far I have only seen them available for desktops.

They have built a few prototypes but they consume HUGE amounts of power (but that prototype was built a few issues back in MaximumPC) so that must have been 6 months or so ago.

I would say give it another year or so

[ZMan2k2]

Sweet! :thumbsup: I love beyond for getting a straight answer almost immediatly. Good info!

[Unknown303]

Intel offers two quad cores at the moment in the 65 nm, LGA775 architecture. At the 65nm they should actually be fairly easy on power supplies but the 775 pin set would be a hard one to find for mobile devices. Generally the 775 pin set is only found in desktops.

However from the intel site they actually list the features with a mention of laptop performance being exceptional with the new power management in the chips along with the 65 nm chip being small and demanding less.

Features
- Intel® Wide Dynamic Execution, enabling delivery of more instructions per clock cycle to improve execution time and energy efficiency
- Intel® Intelligent Power Capability, designed to deliver more energy-efficient performance and smarter battery performance in your laptop
- Intel® Smart Memory Access, improving system performance by optimizing the use of the available data bandwidth
- Intel® Advanced Smart Cache, providing a higher-performance, more efficient cache subsystem. Optimized for multi-core and dual-core processors
- Intel® Advanced Digital Media Boost, accelerating a broad range of applications, including video, speech and image, photo processing, encryption, financial, engineering and scientific applications

All Intel® Core™2 Quad processors feature:
- Intel® Quad-core Technology
- Intel® Virtualization Technology
- Intel® Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technology
- Intel® Execute Disable Bit
- Intel® 64-bitΦ

Either way there is a 2.4 and a 2.66 GHz.

Specifications
Model Number: Intel® Core™2 Quad Processor Q6600
Architecture: 65 nm, LGA775
Cache: 2x4MB L2
Clock Speed: 2.40 GHz
Front Side Bus: 1066 MHz
Multi-core: Yes, Quad-Core
Intel® Virutalization Technology: Yes
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technology: Yes
Intel® EM64T: Yes
Execute Disable Bit: Yes

Specifications
Model Number: Intel® Core™2 Quad Processor Q6700
Architecture: 65 nm, LGA775
Cache: 2x4MB L2
Clock Speed: 2.66 GHz
Front Side Bus: 1066 MHz
Multi-core: Yes, Quad-Core
Intel® Virutalization Technology: Yes
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technology: Yes
Intel® EM64T: Yes
Execute Disable Bit: Yes

[92_VTEC_lude]

this is a true story direct to the dumb ass saleman who is working at MDG computer store:
my friend was going to buy a PC from them, so he went there last month and the saleman was trying to sell him a 6GHZ PC as it is a dual core and each core is running at 3GHZ, my friend called me and handed the phone to the dumbasss saleman and he even told me the same thing about the 6GHZ system he is trying to sell to my friend. I calmly told him on the phone that I am having a 14GHZ system running in my house at the moment (quad core Q6600 runnning at 3.5GHZ) and would blow his 6GHZ system away for less money....:D :D, there was a big PAUSE in the other end and he handed the phone back to my friend right away and I told my friend to go home and build him nice system for less money but I can not stop him from keep on asking me of a 6GHZ system, I guess the saleman already did some damage to his brain with the big BS PC number.....
I saw other computer store even advertised their 4 - 6 GHZ PC in Calgary SUN b4 but I forgot the name of the store now....:thumbsdow

[The Cosworth]

that is false advertising, I can't remember where the threshold for frequency is but IIRC for processors it is between 4 and 5GHz, hence the move to multiple cores. In school we had a teacher who had his electronic/computer engineering degree and he was telling us about it, how the induction and capacitance in the components change exponentially when you get up to those frequencies making it impossible to engineer the transistor/resistor sizes properly. Calling a 3GHz quad core a 12Ghz processor just sounds wrong, because a REAL 12Ghz processor would KILL a multicore in single task applications (which are the majority still).


Too bad that the average consumer will fall for it hey.






Unknown.... good post

[Kavy]

Rice back to your question dual core is just that 2 cores (processors) on one chip. When they advertise dual core always make sure that its the newer technology (core 2 duo) rather then the old. When it comes to AMD the X2 is their newest technology thats currently affordable on the market.

[Kavy]

Side note it amazes me how quick they dropped quad core, I have one in my desktop and it runs no better then my 2.4 Core 2 duo. give it a year however and it will be eating up my core 2 duo when developers starting using its power.

[dj_rice]

Thanks Kavy....


Reason I'm asking is, I'm in the market for either a laptop or a better computer, all I need is something that can run my DJ software and not freeze up or lag while I'm DJing...right now for my desktop I'm using a E-machines POS, with Celeron D 335 2.8GHZ with 1GB ram, it came with 256 and when I upgraded to 1GB I didnt even notice a difference really...


So, which one is better in terms of value and performance, the AMD Athlon X2, AMD Turion X2, Intel Centrino M Core Duo or the Intel Pentium Core Duo..

[Tripz]

1. Intel Centrino Core 2 Duo
2. AMD Turion 62 X2
3. Intel Centrino Core Duo
4. AMD Athlon X2 64

Those would be my pick from best to last

[dj_rice]

Originally posted by Tripz
1. Intel Centrino Core 2 Duo
2. AMD Turion 62 X2
3. Intel Centrino Core Duo
4. AMD Athlon X2 64

Those would be my pick from best to last


Pentiums not in there?And ur picks...are those for value/performance

[Tripz]

Intel core 2 duo would be my pick for performance/value. Intel Pentium D would be my last pick haha.

[Ashers]

I think DJ_Rice is talking about the new budget dual cores... the "Pentium Dual Core", like the T2060 or T2050. Not that great... basically two pentium m's bolted together. My sister has one in her laptop... and things can get pretty leisurely. At least in comparison to my MacBook (non pro, C2D T7200, GMA950), or my dads Pentium D 805.

[HyperZell]

Originally posted by dj_rice



Pentiums not in there?And ur picks...are those for value/performance


There is no more Pentium - Intel retired that name. Now it's all about the Core 2 Duo, or the Quads.

I've gone through lots of system builds (I work at MemX) and I'll make the same recommendation to you that I make to everyone else - stick with Intel. If you're a basic user, get a nice Core 2 Duo, like an E6550 or better. If you want power/longevity, get a Quad - the Q6600 is $290, and the Q6700 is $670...so yeah, get the Q6600.

Start with that, at least 2GBs of RAM, and a decent mobo, and you're set.

[Unknown303]

One of the few programs that you could really gauge the performance difference between a Core 2 Duo and a Quad would be one of the games based on the source platform (Half-life2, Portal, TF2) The engine for these games supports any number of cores and even the step from a single to a double will nearly net double the performance.

Depending on the applications you use a 3.0GHz could feel like a 3 or a 6 it depends if the programs capable of using the second processor.

[Spike_16v]

Flight Sim X is a good test also, my 6600 is at 3.2. When loading a flight it really works at it. It's the only time I have ever seen all four CPU meters over 40% let alone pinned.

When doing single thread stuff, it's not much faster then my MacBook.

[dj_rice]

So I've narrowed it down to a few computers....lemme know ur guys opionion


I'm heavily leaning on picking up this one as its Acer with Intel Core 2 Duo T5450 and has 2 GB ram and only $599

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0665000FS10097026&catid=



Toshiba $499 AMD Athlon 64X2 TK55

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0665000FS10095163&catid=


Theres a few others on Futureshops website but dont compare to pricing/processor type and RAM amount to the $599 Acer...good buy?

[em2ab]

Originally posted by dj_rice
So I've narrowed it down to a few computers....lemme know ur guys opionion


I'm heavily leaning on picking up this one as its Acer with Intel Core 2 Duo T5450 and has 2 GB ram and only $599

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0665000FS10097026&catid=



Toshiba $499 AMD Athlon 64X2 TK55

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0665000FS10095163&catid=


Theres a few others on Futureshops website but dont compare to pricing/processor type and RAM amount to the $599 Acer...good buy?

That second one is pretty wicked, I didn't look at the first because I prefer AMD over Intel. The only bad things about it are the smaller 15.4 inch screen (I prefer 17 inch) and the slower 4200 RPM hard drive. Most laptop drives now are 5400 and most desktop drives now are 10000. Otherwise it's real nice, does it come with Vista too?

I don't know if this has been mentioned already but there's a difference for the original poster between the 1.5 processors he's looking at in the laptops and the 2.8 he's got in his desktop. Previously the chips were operating on some weird calculation for speed and it was going upwards of 3.8ghz or something like that at the end. Finally something happened and the new standard because the actual computing speed which turned out to be lower than 2.0 for most of them and now that's what they're rated at. So that 1.5 could be similar to the other 2.8, maybe a little slower.
At least that's how it was explained to me and it makes sense. But I'd be real surprised if they put quad cores in any laptop because it'll kill the battery life to have that many processors throwing information around.

[dj_rice]

Originally posted by em2ab


That second one is pretty wicked, I didn't look at the first because I prefer AMD over Intel. The only bad things about it are the smaller 15.4 inch screen (I prefer 17 inch) and the slower 4200 RPM hard drive. Most laptop drives now are 5400 and most desktop drives now are 10000. Otherwise it's real nice, does it come with Vista too?

I don't know if this has been mentioned already but there's a difference for the original poster between the 1.5 processors he's looking at in the laptops and the 2.8 he's got in his desktop. Previously the chips were operating on some weird calculation for speed and it was going upwards of 3.8ghz or something like that at the end. Finally something happened and the new standard because the actual computing speed which turned out to be lower than 2.0 for most of them and now that's what they're rated at. So that 1.5 could be similar to the other 2.8, maybe a little slower.
At least that's how it was explained to me and it makes sense. But I'd be real surprised if they put quad cores in any laptop because it'll kill the battery life to have that many processors throwing information around.


Whyd u prefer the Toshiba one?It has the lower speed HD, the Cache is L1 64KB/64KB, L2 512KB compared to the Intels 2MB L2....I have no clue what it means but bigger is also bigger right?And I've been reading and hearin from people who have the Turion that it runs really hot?And yes both of them come with Vista, and from all the Google reviews I've read, the Intel Core 2 Duo runs circles around the Turion X2?

[em2ab]

Originally posted by dj_rice



Whyd u prefer the Toshiba one?It has the lower speed HD, the Cache is L1 64KB/64KB, L2 512KB compared to the Intels 2MB L2....I have no clue what it means but bigger is also bigger right?And I've been reading and hearin from people who have the Turion that it runs really hot?And yes both of them come with Vista, and from all the Google reviews I've read, the Intel Core 2 Duo runs circles around the Turion X2?
You might be completely right, I can only talk about the Turion, I bought one a week ago. It gets pretty hot I guess, but the IBM Thinkpad I had before was way hotter and it was Intel. I just bought a HP Turion 64 X2 with 17 inch monitor, I love it. It's pretty fast but the video card is shit.

[HyperZell]

If it's just between those two laptops, the first one, the Acer, is the better one.

And no, most desktop hard drives are not 10 000RPM. Those are only in hard drives like Western Digital Raptors, which most people don't have. The desktop hard drive standard is still 7200RPM.

[Euro838]

Thinking about picking one of the laptops at BB that's on sale. My question is, would I notice a difference with an Athlon x2 62 1.7ghz vs a turion x2 64 1.9ghz laptop used mainly for email, surfing, burning CDs/DVDs, Office, etc?

[dj_rice]

Originally posted by Euro838
Thinking about picking one of the laptops at BB that's on sale. My question is, would I notice a difference with an Athlon x2 62 1.7ghz vs a turion x2 64 1.9ghz laptop used mainly for email, surfing, burning CDs/DVDs, Office, etc?


As I've read from Googling, Athlon is mainly a desktop processor, while Turion was invented for laptop/mobile technology so its laptop processor, in terms of performance, I think the Athlon would be quicker but would run way hotter, whereas the Turion was be a tad slower but run cooler...


I'd get the Turion if your just doin basic things, but the Athlon for gaming...but this is my opinion based on what I've read so dont quote me...someone can chime in if I'm wrong