Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Del Boy]

Well guys as you know i've got my luvly laptop now i've just bought this the wife picked it up on her way home from work luvly machine
http://www.comet.co.uk/cometbrowse/product.do?sku=351091 and it goes with my BT home hub  [smiley=laugh.gif] not a bad price i thought

[Doughboy]

Good spec machine m8. Used to work for Fujitsu. What warranty did you get with it? On site or RTB?

[supermop]

Nice. Core 2 Duo is the way forward  

Coulda got you one cheaper though!

[Marks DTM Calib]

Is it realy only 1.86G core speed....seems very slow even for a dual core as any twin processor architecture does not give a doubling of throughput due to the over head of the sharing.

I have to say that I am a real fan of AMD (not that I currently run an AMD processor)

[supermop]

Clock speed is pretty irrelevant these days.

It's all down to the design of the CPU - the on board cache, bus and pipelines. There are also major re-works of the actual CPU architecture so it performs most functions way more efficiently at lower clock speeds (thus improving power efficnency and heat dissipation). The problem Intel had with the P3 and P4 was that they relied on clock speeds to sell their CPU's, which was BS because they were a crap architecture, and they performed like an american muscle car - all grunt and noise, but no real speed!

Dual core does double the clock speed. The problem isn't the sharing, as each core has its own L1 cache and bus on the chip dye. The problem and the reason that you don't benefit from the doubling of the clock speeds is that current operating systems are not designed to efficiently manage and utilise more than one core at a time.

You realise, AMD have always had lower clocks than Intel CPUs? For example, my Athlon XP 3200+ is only 2.4ghz. That out-performs an Intel P4 3.2ghz CPU in almost every benchmark. Well, it matches it at least! It won't win on raw data throughput for obvious reasons however.

The Athlon 64 X2's are also very low clock speeds. It's how AMD maintain excellent power/heat efficnency and their CPU architecture and bus size more than makes up for it.

As it stands, the current top and middle end Core 2 Duo's (Conroe model) outperform the fastest AMD chip - the FX 64 dual core - in every single benchmark there is available to modern computing. In short, they rock.

Power consumption
Game/3D benchmarks
Application benchmarks

I think you get it  

Just keep clicking next for proof the Core 2 Duo is the best CPU out there. Also the most expensive!

[bob.dent]

Clock speed is pretty irrelevant these days.

It's all down to the design of the CPU - the on board cache, bus and pipelines. There are also major re-works of the actual CPU architecture so it performs most functions way more efficiently at lower clock speeds (thus improving power efficnency and heat dissipation). The problem Intel had with the P3 and P4 was that they relied on clock speeds to sell their CPU's, which was BS because they were a crap architecture, and they performed like an american muscle car - all grunt and noise, but no real speed!

Dual core does double the clock speed. The problem isn't the sharing, as each core has its own L1 cache and bus on the chip dye. The problem and the reason that you don't benefit from the doubling of the clock speeds is that current operating systems are not designed to efficiently manage and utilise more than one core at a time.

You realise, AMD have always had lower clocks than Intel CPUs? For example, my Athlon XP 3200+ is only 2.4ghz. That out-performs an Intel P4 3.2ghz extreme edition CPU in almost every benchmark. It won't win on raw data throughput for obvious reasons however.

The Athlon 64 X2's are also very low clock speeds. It's how AMD maintain excellent power/heat efficnency and their CPU architecture and bus size more than makes up for it.

As it stands, the current top and middle end Core 2 Duo's (Conroe model) outperform the fastest AMD chip - the FX 66 dual core in every single benchmark there is available to modern computing. In short, they rock.

Phew.......did everyone understand that??

[supermop]

Oi, you quoted me while i was still editing. I posted too early, and got some facts wrong!

That was a slight information overload though I suppose

[TheBoy]

Is it realy only 1.86G core speed....seems very slow even for a dual core as any twin processor architecture does not give a doubling of throughput due to the over head of the sharing.

I have to say that I am a real fan of AMD (not that I currently run an AMD processor)

AMD run slow clock speeds as well.  My opinion is that real world, a P4 3.2Ghz will outperform a 3200+ AMD chip - AMD design their chips for benchmarking, an integer benchmarks have always been strong point of Athlon architecture.

The Centrino derived chips are very efficient, though some things - video compression - does still suit P4 long pipelines better...

Core 2 Duo is a very good multiprocessor setup, building on Intel's lead on multiprocessor experience. Though obviously not anywhere near twice the speed...

[Del Boy]

I dont care about all this lol i like it and it does the job 4 me and i persoally think it's really good but i will say it's very hard to clock an intel processor and it's easy with an AMD, AMD are stronger and can put up with more hassel like my son has a AMD X2 3800+ processor in his comp and it handels anything you throw at it not saying intel arn't good but i have an intel yes i really like it and glad i bought it but i do rate AMD's more but love these core duo2 processor understand that guys   (it's late and i've drunk 2 many fosters )

[Marks DTM Calib]

Does anybody actuly realy understand what pipelining is......its something I personaly did at a gate level many moons ago in FPGA design to get the clock speed up......

[bob.dent]

Does anybody actuly realy understand what pipelining is......its something I personaly did at a gate level many moons ago in FPGA design to get the clock speed up......

I bet Supermop does

[theolodian]

I don't see how any of this matters.  I have a Mac Mini dual core with 1GB of RAM.  Windows is still pathetically slow, but Mac OS works great.  In Windows for normal use it is no faster than my Celeron 1.4GHz 512MB laptop.  In fact the laptop is faster, I think because it has dedicated video memory.  I'm looking for a new laptop, and price is more important than processor.  I found one with the 14" widescreen and all of the normal features except dual core and WiFi for $480 (brand new).  Not having WiFi is the part that bothers me!  It sucks having to shut down PCMCIA cards and take them out all the time.

[Marks DTM Calib]

I only asked the question to see if anybody realy understood it and had recognised what a marketing gimmic it realy was........

[theolodian]

I only asked the question to see if anybody realy understood it and had recognised what a marketing gimmic it realy was........

I was talking about clock speeds and dual core.  Oh, I get it, you were too