Core 2 Duo has been one of the most important launches for Intel in quite some time, really taking back the Desktop market by storm. Yet, even when I was in Germany at a pre-launch briefing of Conroe/Core 2 Duo, Intel suggested that quad core wasn't far off either. In fact, the computer being used for the PowerPoint presentation, was in fact Kentsfield – Intel's code name for its quad core processor. Not particuarly good use of resources, but an excellent demonstration of the state of play.
November has come around, and true to Intel's word, quad-core is here. It seems like only yesterday we were marvelling at the first dual-core solutions, so to have a “quad-core” processor in front of me, seems almost surreal. However, in actuality, this isn't as much of a technological feat as you might think. Eighty cores, as demonstrated at IDF
Intel has basically taken two Core 2 Duo dies and just put them in to one package. I think Intel realises that this is cheating a little and that's why the product name is Core 2 Extreme QX6700, which apart from the subtle “Q”, doesn't mention quad anywhere in the name. This is an Extreme Edition processor, so is naturally expensive, initially priced at $999. This isn't far off the current price of an Core 2 Extreme X6800 (£643), so in comparison, it's pretty good value.
Technically speaking, the fact the cores are in the same package is irrelevant. In order for data to be communicated between the two dies, the data needs to go through the North Bridge, via the Front Side Bus. Essentially, it means the performance will be identical to having two separate processors in two separate sockets.
Intel's approach does have its benefits though. For one, by having all four cores in the same package, there is only one heatsink. Any boards that currently support Core 2 Duo, will support Kentsfield as well. In saying that, we had to update the BIOS on our Gigabyte 965P motherboard, in order to get it to boot. It also makes designing a decent motherboard a lot easier and means we can expect to see quad-core hitting the MicroATX platform
Friday, February 6, 2009
Intel Core 2 Duo 'Conroe' E6400, E6600, E6700, X6800
Without a doubt, Core 2 Duo or "Conroe" as it is code-named has been one of the most anticipated product launches in the hardware community for quite some time. Everybody has been waiting to see if Intel can claim back the performance crown and push under the rug the disappointment that was the NetBurst architecture. The string of Pentium 4/NetBurst products that Intel released had so many faults that I won't embarrass Intel by listing them. Put simply, NetBurst never reached the potential Intel believed it was capable of. However, financially it did very well as Intel is incredibly good at marketing, while AMD seems happy to sit by as the underdog expecting PC enthusiasts to do all its advertising for it.
On a number of occasions I've had the opportunity to play with Pentium M on desktop motherboards and it has been the closest experience yet to re-creating my Mendocino Celeron A overclocking days. So naturally, I have been looking to Conroe with anticipation.
Conroe is nothing like any previous Pentium 4 products. In fact, it's based on the mobile Core Duo design which is in itself based on Pentium M, which is based on Pentium 3 architecture. So Intel has actually done a bit of a U-turn.
Compared to Pentium 4, Core Duo (not to be confused with Core 2 Duo) offers low power consumption, low waste heat and high performance per clock. This is almost an exact opposite to the Pentium 4 which used so much power that the ATX specification had to be modified to add more 12V rails, and produced so much heat that they often throttled and made reaching 4GHz almost impossible. Not only this, but clock for clock performance wasn't stellar – hence the need for higher clock speeds in the first place. The resultant disparity between AMDs and Intel's clock speed was one of the primary reasons for AMD introducing PR ratings (eg. 5000+) so that consumers didn't feel like they were getting a raw deal.
AMD's biggest selling point has been its on die memory controller. This has had a lot of knock on effects (such as almost identical performance from motherboard to motherboard), but the main effect is a huge reduction in memory latency as communication is no longer passed through the north bridge. This, in combination with HyperTransport reduced the bottleneck of the front side bus. Memory performance affects system performance significantly, so Intel processors were suffering in this area a lot.
Intel's solution to this is several minor improvements to the Core architecture in order to reduce this memory latency and increase overall system performance. Most of these optimisations are quite minor, but put together add up to more than the sum of their parts. Quite frankly, how Intel has improved their architecture so much is largely irrelevant - performance figures tell us all we need to know.
Possibly the biggest improvement is an added pipeline. Where as Core Duo can complete three instructions per cycle, Core 2 Duo can now complete four which an obvious increase in processing power and efficiency.
To help reduce bottlenecks, the front side bus has been increased to 1,066MHz from the 800Mhz that all but a few of the Extreme Edition processors used. This is at a base frequency of 266MHz, quad pumped.
If it wasn't completely obvious, the "Duo" portion of the name indicates that these are dual-core processors. Unlike previous Pentium D processors, these use a shared Level 2 cache (2MB or 4MB depending on the processor). This can be dynamically allocated depending on the task being run. For instance, if running an application that isn't multi-threaded (i.e. can't take advantage of a second core), then the primary core would get the full 4MB of Level 2 cache. Having more Level 2 cache means that fewer requests need to be made to the system memory – one of the biggest causes of latency.
On a number of occasions I've had the opportunity to play with Pentium M on desktop motherboards and it has been the closest experience yet to re-creating my Mendocino Celeron A overclocking days. So naturally, I have been looking to Conroe with anticipation.
Conroe is nothing like any previous Pentium 4 products. In fact, it's based on the mobile Core Duo design which is in itself based on Pentium M, which is based on Pentium 3 architecture. So Intel has actually done a bit of a U-turn.
Compared to Pentium 4, Core Duo (not to be confused with Core 2 Duo) offers low power consumption, low waste heat and high performance per clock. This is almost an exact opposite to the Pentium 4 which used so much power that the ATX specification had to be modified to add more 12V rails, and produced so much heat that they often throttled and made reaching 4GHz almost impossible. Not only this, but clock for clock performance wasn't stellar – hence the need for higher clock speeds in the first place. The resultant disparity between AMDs and Intel's clock speed was one of the primary reasons for AMD introducing PR ratings (eg. 5000+) so that consumers didn't feel like they were getting a raw deal.
AMD's biggest selling point has been its on die memory controller. This has had a lot of knock on effects (such as almost identical performance from motherboard to motherboard), but the main effect is a huge reduction in memory latency as communication is no longer passed through the north bridge. This, in combination with HyperTransport reduced the bottleneck of the front side bus. Memory performance affects system performance significantly, so Intel processors were suffering in this area a lot.
Intel's solution to this is several minor improvements to the Core architecture in order to reduce this memory latency and increase overall system performance. Most of these optimisations are quite minor, but put together add up to more than the sum of their parts. Quite frankly, how Intel has improved their architecture so much is largely irrelevant - performance figures tell us all we need to know.
Possibly the biggest improvement is an added pipeline. Where as Core Duo can complete three instructions per cycle, Core 2 Duo can now complete four which an obvious increase in processing power and efficiency.
To help reduce bottlenecks, the front side bus has been increased to 1,066MHz from the 800Mhz that all but a few of the Extreme Edition processors used. This is at a base frequency of 266MHz, quad pumped.
If it wasn't completely obvious, the "Duo" portion of the name indicates that these are dual-core processors. Unlike previous Pentium D processors, these use a shared Level 2 cache (2MB or 4MB depending on the processor). This can be dynamically allocated depending on the task being run. For instance, if running an application that isn't multi-threaded (i.e. can't take advantage of a second core), then the primary core would get the full 4MB of Level 2 cache. Having more Level 2 cache means that fewer requests need to be made to the system memory – one of the biggest causes of latency.
Intel Core 2 Duo Mobile Processor Review - T7600
A month ago we showed you exclusive testing results (here) of the new Intel Core 2 Duo T7400 “Merom†CPU . While those initial results showed good improvements in floating point operation, a quick test revealed that battery life (here) showed that our testing platform was still not ready for prime time as the T7400 should have battery performance by design.
The Core 2 Duo T7600 we are looking at today is a production sample (read: very likely the same quality and performance you will get at a retailer) clocked at 2.33 GHz, slightly faster than the 2.16 GHz on the T7400 sample we tested a month ago. And what a difference a month makes! Intel has made the improvements where it counts -- lower power consumption which translates into better battery life!
Intel has done it! While in our early look at the T7400 showed rather poor battery performance the T7600 we have tested today, which is heading into production, has made drastic improvements. We can now say without a doubt that Intel's latest mobile CPU has nailed the holy grail in mobile computing - it performs faster, consumes less power, and generates less heat. What else is there to say besides that?
Now with power and heat issues all sorted out, there's no reason why you shouldn't consider the Core 2 Duo in your next laptop. With price points as low as $209 for the T5500 up to the T7600 at $637, there’s a Core 2 Duo mobile CPU to suit all budgets and designs. It really looks like Intel has another hit CPU on their hands and with all the design innovations from laptop vendors, it's hard not to be a little excited when looking forward. It's definitely a good time to be looking into a notebook computer and Intel has given us many reasons to with their Core 2 Duo CPUs!
So in the end, we're giving this CPU an Editor's Choice Award. The latest Core 2 Duo mobile CPU is cooler, faster, and runs longer than the older Core Duo. Not only that, it has technology improvements under the hood like a larger level 2 cache (4MB) and 64-bit extensions to support 64-bit OSes like the upcoming Windows Vista. If you've had reservations before about getting a laptop, the Core 2 Duo should have you convinced. Intel's track record in this arena is strong, and their latest CPU just solidifies their lead.
The Core 2 Duo T7600 we are looking at today is a production sample (read: very likely the same quality and performance you will get at a retailer) clocked at 2.33 GHz, slightly faster than the 2.16 GHz on the T7400 sample we tested a month ago. And what a difference a month makes! Intel has made the improvements where it counts -- lower power consumption which translates into better battery life!
Intel has done it! While in our early look at the T7400 showed rather poor battery performance the T7600 we have tested today, which is heading into production, has made drastic improvements. We can now say without a doubt that Intel's latest mobile CPU has nailed the holy grail in mobile computing - it performs faster, consumes less power, and generates less heat. What else is there to say besides that?
Now with power and heat issues all sorted out, there's no reason why you shouldn't consider the Core 2 Duo in your next laptop. With price points as low as $209 for the T5500 up to the T7600 at $637, there’s a Core 2 Duo mobile CPU to suit all budgets and designs. It really looks like Intel has another hit CPU on their hands and with all the design innovations from laptop vendors, it's hard not to be a little excited when looking forward. It's definitely a good time to be looking into a notebook computer and Intel has given us many reasons to with their Core 2 Duo CPUs!
So in the end, we're giving this CPU an Editor's Choice Award. The latest Core 2 Duo mobile CPU is cooler, faster, and runs longer than the older Core Duo. Not only that, it has technology improvements under the hood like a larger level 2 cache (4MB) and 64-bit extensions to support 64-bit OSes like the upcoming Windows Vista. If you've had reservations before about getting a laptop, the Core 2 Duo should have you convinced. Intel's track record in this arena is strong, and their latest CPU just solidifies their lead.
Intel Conroe Core 2 Duo/Extreme Processors
Intel's new Core 2 architecture builds on the foundations laid down by the Core micro-architecture which debuted on Intel's current range of dual-core mobile CPUs. Again, those unfamiliar to the new terminology may know them as Yonah.
Let's be clear about this. Intel, by moving away from NetBurst and the ultra-high clockspeeds required for the Pentium 4 series to be competitive against AMD's Athlon 64 series, has decided that a new micro-architecture was required that would provide both excellent performance and be energy-efficient, too. That, then, spelt an end to the Pentium 4 as Intel's consumer CPU of choice. It's still around, of course, but Core 2 Duo/Extreme is now positioned as Intel's performance CPU.
The following table details the range of Core 2-based CPUs Intel will be offering right off the bat, along with a Pentium Extreme Edition 965 and Athlon 64 FX-62 for reference. We'll then discuss the reasons behind why Core 2 is destined to give AMD a very hard time.
Models
Intel is initially launching Core 2 Duo at a starting speed-grade of 1.83GHz. This model, designated E6300, will be equipped with 2MiB of L2 cache and falls under the codename of Allendale. We expect Intel to release a lower-clocked version in the near future. Other than a lower clock speed and 2MiB L2 cache, the E6300 is, for all intents and purposes, architecturally identical to the rest of the Duo range; it's no Celeron model. That's especially gratifying with respect to its relatively low price.
The range is headlined by the Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800, which operates at 2.93GHz and, like Extreme Editions before, is multiplier-unlocked. Deep-walleted enthusiasts will have some fun with this one.
Let's digest the information above, particularly the architectural elements, with some insightful commentary.
Architecture analysis
Here's what makes the Core 2 Duo tick, folks.
Dual-core support
Intel Core 2 Duo-based CPUs will harness two execution cores based on a single piece of silicon. The cores communicate with the rest of the system via a single bus, which will be clocked in at 1066MHz and offer around 8.5GB/s CPU-to-MCH bandwidth. Initial Core 2 Duo CPUs will be manufactured on Intel's proven 65nm process. Projections state that 45nm production will begin in Q2 2007. Core 2 Duo supports a 14-stage execution pipeline, down (read better) from the 31 present on the Prescott-based Pentium 4.
Wide Dynamic Execution
Current x86 processors can deliver 3 instructions per clock cycle. Core 2 Duo, however, has been architected to fetch, dispatch, execute and retire up to four full instructions simultaneously, offering a 33% boost over, say, a Pentium 4 CPU. Allied to this, Core 2 Duo also supports what Intel terms Macro-Fusion, which can combine certain common x86 instructions (pairs, say, compare and conditional jump) into a single instruction (micro-op) for execution, thereby reducing overall processing time. Processing efficiency is the name of the game here.
Intel Smart Memory Access and Advanced Smart Cache
Higher-end Core 2 Duo CPUs will be equipped with 4MiB of on-chip L2 cache, minimising the need to run back to system memory for frequently used data. Unlike the present Pentium 4 micro-architecture, Core 2 Duo's two cores will share the cache amongst each other. Intel's engineering team has found that forcing the cores to individually allocate and use cache is more efficient than allotting a fixed, per-core amount. By varying the amount of cache split over the two cores Intel hopes that cache misses, the bane of modern CPUs in terms of execution efficiency, will be further reduced.
Core 2 Duo also supports what Intel terms Smart Memory Access. Put simply, and falling under the banner of memory disambiguation, it's a form of out-of-order, built-in intelligence that predicts and loads the upcoming instruction data before current store instructions have been processed. Intel has designed algorithms that can accurately predict whether a load can be processed before the store, thereby, again, potentially saving overall execution time.
Coupled with a heavily optimised cache, and thinking about it how it all fits together, the Core 2 Duo's memory access latency will be better than the present Pentium 4's, for the reasons discussed above. Intel has toyed with the idea of integrating a memory controller right on the CPU die itself, a la AMD, but reckons that Core 2 Duo's intelligent architecture masks latency well enough for it to do without. We'll put this assertion to the test in our ScienceMark 2.0 memory latency analysis.
Advanced Media Boost
Increasing efficiency with Streaming SIMD (Single Instruction Multiple Data) Extentions, Core 2 Duo CPUs are able to process a 128-bit instruction in a single clock cycle, rather than requiring the incumbent two clocks that current generations employ.
Intelligent Power Capability
Intel has designed Core 2 Duo not only to perform well on a clock-for-clock basis but also to be energy-efficient whilst doing so. This is precisely where its mobile heritage shines through. Intelligent, which seems to be the watchword for Core 2 Duo, management monitors core usage and application requirements such that it can power-gate parts of the CPU when not in use; there's little need for two cores running at full power in single-threaded applications, for example. Intel reckons that it has improved the physical requirements of power-gating enough for it to offer better power consumption than previous generations'.
Intel indicates that all Core 2 Duo models (barring Extreme) will harness a 65W TDP; half that of the Pentium Extreme Edition 965 CPU. The Core 2 Duo Extreme, however, ships with a slightly higher 75W TDP.
Further, Conroe will ship with an integrated digital thermal sensor. The sensor is embedded on the die itself and will give more-accurate readings. Incidentally, the 965 Express chipset family supports Intel Quiet System Technology, which intelligently manages processor and system fan-speeds in relation to core temperature, ensuring the fan(s) are spun just fast enough to keep the processor from throttling.
Virtualisation Technology, 64-bit processing
Virtualisation Technology offers hardware-isolated virtual partitions that allow the user to run multiple operating systems on one PC, and 64-bit processing (EMT64), along with Execute Disable Bit, is carried over from the Pentium 4 line of CPUs.
Let's be clear about this. Intel, by moving away from NetBurst and the ultra-high clockspeeds required for the Pentium 4 series to be competitive against AMD's Athlon 64 series, has decided that a new micro-architecture was required that would provide both excellent performance and be energy-efficient, too. That, then, spelt an end to the Pentium 4 as Intel's consumer CPU of choice. It's still around, of course, but Core 2 Duo/Extreme is now positioned as Intel's performance CPU.
The following table details the range of Core 2-based CPUs Intel will be offering right off the bat, along with a Pentium Extreme Edition 965 and Athlon 64 FX-62 for reference. We'll then discuss the reasons behind why Core 2 is destined to give AMD a very hard time.
Models
Intel is initially launching Core 2 Duo at a starting speed-grade of 1.83GHz. This model, designated E6300, will be equipped with 2MiB of L2 cache and falls under the codename of Allendale. We expect Intel to release a lower-clocked version in the near future. Other than a lower clock speed and 2MiB L2 cache, the E6300 is, for all intents and purposes, architecturally identical to the rest of the Duo range; it's no Celeron model. That's especially gratifying with respect to its relatively low price.
The range is headlined by the Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800, which operates at 2.93GHz and, like Extreme Editions before, is multiplier-unlocked. Deep-walleted enthusiasts will have some fun with this one.
Let's digest the information above, particularly the architectural elements, with some insightful commentary.
Architecture analysis
Here's what makes the Core 2 Duo tick, folks.
Dual-core support
Intel Core 2 Duo-based CPUs will harness two execution cores based on a single piece of silicon. The cores communicate with the rest of the system via a single bus, which will be clocked in at 1066MHz and offer around 8.5GB/s CPU-to-MCH bandwidth. Initial Core 2 Duo CPUs will be manufactured on Intel's proven 65nm process. Projections state that 45nm production will begin in Q2 2007. Core 2 Duo supports a 14-stage execution pipeline, down (read better) from the 31 present on the Prescott-based Pentium 4.
Wide Dynamic Execution
Current x86 processors can deliver 3 instructions per clock cycle. Core 2 Duo, however, has been architected to fetch, dispatch, execute and retire up to four full instructions simultaneously, offering a 33% boost over, say, a Pentium 4 CPU. Allied to this, Core 2 Duo also supports what Intel terms Macro-Fusion, which can combine certain common x86 instructions (pairs, say, compare and conditional jump) into a single instruction (micro-op) for execution, thereby reducing overall processing time. Processing efficiency is the name of the game here.
Intel Smart Memory Access and Advanced Smart Cache
Higher-end Core 2 Duo CPUs will be equipped with 4MiB of on-chip L2 cache, minimising the need to run back to system memory for frequently used data. Unlike the present Pentium 4 micro-architecture, Core 2 Duo's two cores will share the cache amongst each other. Intel's engineering team has found that forcing the cores to individually allocate and use cache is more efficient than allotting a fixed, per-core amount. By varying the amount of cache split over the two cores Intel hopes that cache misses, the bane of modern CPUs in terms of execution efficiency, will be further reduced.
Core 2 Duo also supports what Intel terms Smart Memory Access. Put simply, and falling under the banner of memory disambiguation, it's a form of out-of-order, built-in intelligence that predicts and loads the upcoming instruction data before current store instructions have been processed. Intel has designed algorithms that can accurately predict whether a load can be processed before the store, thereby, again, potentially saving overall execution time.
Coupled with a heavily optimised cache, and thinking about it how it all fits together, the Core 2 Duo's memory access latency will be better than the present Pentium 4's, for the reasons discussed above. Intel has toyed with the idea of integrating a memory controller right on the CPU die itself, a la AMD, but reckons that Core 2 Duo's intelligent architecture masks latency well enough for it to do without. We'll put this assertion to the test in our ScienceMark 2.0 memory latency analysis.
Advanced Media Boost
Increasing efficiency with Streaming SIMD (Single Instruction Multiple Data) Extentions, Core 2 Duo CPUs are able to process a 128-bit instruction in a single clock cycle, rather than requiring the incumbent two clocks that current generations employ.
Intelligent Power Capability
Intel has designed Core 2 Duo not only to perform well on a clock-for-clock basis but also to be energy-efficient whilst doing so. This is precisely where its mobile heritage shines through. Intelligent, which seems to be the watchword for Core 2 Duo, management monitors core usage and application requirements such that it can power-gate parts of the CPU when not in use; there's little need for two cores running at full power in single-threaded applications, for example. Intel reckons that it has improved the physical requirements of power-gating enough for it to offer better power consumption than previous generations'.
Intel indicates that all Core 2 Duo models (barring Extreme) will harness a 65W TDP; half that of the Pentium Extreme Edition 965 CPU. The Core 2 Duo Extreme, however, ships with a slightly higher 75W TDP.
Further, Conroe will ship with an integrated digital thermal sensor. The sensor is embedded on the die itself and will give more-accurate readings. Incidentally, the 965 Express chipset family supports Intel Quiet System Technology, which intelligently manages processor and system fan-speeds in relation to core temperature, ensuring the fan(s) are spun just fast enough to keep the processor from throttling.
Virtualisation Technology, 64-bit processing
Virtualisation Technology offers hardware-isolated virtual partitions that allow the user to run multiple operating systems on one PC, and 64-bit processing (EMT64), along with Execute Disable Bit, is carried over from the Pentium 4 line of CPUs.
Intel Core 2 (Conroe) Performance Review
It has finally happened, Intel will be putting to rest the long standing Pentium branding for their next generation of desktop microprocessors in favor of a totally new line-up simply called Core. However, this isn't just a re-branding exercise for Intel. The Core processors mark Intel's first true major revamp of microprocessor technology since their launch of the NetBurst microarchitecture with the Willamette core Pentium 4 back in the year 2000 and before you know it, we're already at Core 2. Now we're getting ahead of ourselves. Considering the major gear shift at Intel to bring about this day, let's take a brief recap on the chain of events that have lead to the development of the new Core processors.
AMD's sharp rise in market share from their hugely successful Athlon XP, Athlon 64 and dual-core Athlon 64 X2 processors in the past two years has been a rude awakening for Intel. AMD was even making inroads into the server market with their Opteron products and went as bold as to openly challenge Intel's dual-core Xeon on both performance and power consumption fronts in 2005 - a challenge which Intel chose to ignore resulting in defacto bragging rights for AMD for a period of time.
Intel of course has not been sitting idle all this while and we've seen a huge effort in promoting their next generation microarchitecture over the past year, which was basically Intel telling the world 'Wait and see, we'll be back and then we will rock!'. Intel officially unveiled the revolutionary Core microarchitecture early this year at IDF Spring 2006 in San Francisco and wet our lips with a preview of the enhanced power saving features (if not the performance) with the launch of the Core Duo (codenamed Yonah) dual-core mobile processor.
AMD's sharp rise in market share from their hugely successful Athlon XP, Athlon 64 and dual-core Athlon 64 X2 processors in the past two years has been a rude awakening for Intel. AMD was even making inroads into the server market with their Opteron products and went as bold as to openly challenge Intel's dual-core Xeon on both performance and power consumption fronts in 2005 - a challenge which Intel chose to ignore resulting in defacto bragging rights for AMD for a period of time.
Intel of course has not been sitting idle all this while and we've seen a huge effort in promoting their next generation microarchitecture over the past year, which was basically Intel telling the world 'Wait and see, we'll be back and then we will rock!'. Intel officially unveiled the revolutionary Core microarchitecture early this year at IDF Spring 2006 in San Francisco and wet our lips with a preview of the enhanced power saving features (if not the performance) with the launch of the Core Duo (codenamed Yonah) dual-core mobile processor.
Intel Core 2 Duo, 2.40 GHz E6600
Intel's launch of the Core 2 Duo has come and gone, and now, for the most part, the entire range of speeds are available in stores (the 4 big ones of course - Newegg, mWave, ZZF, and TigerDirect). Availability still seems a bit scarce at this moment, and prices will range so shop around. Of course, Intel will likely come up with product in no time, as they are known to do after launching new processors (just don't ask them to do the same with chipsets! But that's for another story).
If you're wondering why this review is late - well there are a few reasons really. First of all, Intel actually pulled back Core 2 Duo from its original release date of July 27th, I guess to get the jump on AMD's planned price drops. So really we're not that far off the original release date ;)
We also had to put together an AMD test system ourselves, because AMD often has problems producing enough CPU's to meet the demands of OEM, retail, and media. I set out to put together the fastest AM2 system I could buy today (ridiculously expensive FX chips notwithstanding). That ended up being an Athlon64 X2 4600+. That's right - the 5000+ and 4800+ parts were nowhere to be seen, even though they launched last May. The retail channel is just starting to get 4800+'s in stock, so the 5000+'s can't be far behind. To round out our AMD system, we went with an Asus motherboard based on NVIDIA's 570 Ultra chipset. Unfortunately I ended up buying my X2 just before the price drops occured... So I paid about $550 USD, while they are now going for around $255-260. Ugh.
Finally, I had major issues with the beta BIOS on the Intel test motherboard. For some reason, the board would no longer POST either of the Core 2 processors after having a Pentium-D installed in it. No matter what I tried, it wouldn't do it. I only had one option - wait for Core 2 to officially launch, and use a production BIOS. Finally, all testing is complete, and I'm ready to report about Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme.
The codenames for the new desktop parts are "Conroe" "Conroe XE" and the lesser-known "Allendale". For the retail market, they are called "Core 2 Duo" and "Core 2 Extreme", even though this is actually their first CPU based on Core, desktop or otherwise.
Conroe and Allendale are identical, except Allendale comes with half the amount of L2 cache - 2MB instead of 4MB. Conroe XE is identical to Conroe, except that it has an unlocked multiplier.
The two Allendale based processors are the E6300, which runs at 1.86 GHz, and the E6400, which runs at 2.13 GHz. The Conroe parts are the E6600 and E6700 which run at 2.40 GHz and 2.67 GHz respectively. Finally, there is the Conroe XE based Core 2 Extreme, which is identical to all other Conroe processors in every way - it's just clocked higher and has an unlocked multiplier. The top Core 2 Extreme (and Intel's top processor of all) is the X6800, which runs at 2.93 GHz.
All of the aforementioned processors run on a quad-pumped 1066 MHz FSB.
The mobile part is codenamed "Merom" and was quietly launched alongside Conroe. It too is called "Core 2 Duo" and "Core 2 Solo" in retail; frontside bus is limited to 667 MHz on these low power-using parts, rather than 1066 MHz. Confused? No kidding.
If you're wondering why this review is late - well there are a few reasons really. First of all, Intel actually pulled back Core 2 Duo from its original release date of July 27th, I guess to get the jump on AMD's planned price drops. So really we're not that far off the original release date ;)
We also had to put together an AMD test system ourselves, because AMD often has problems producing enough CPU's to meet the demands of OEM, retail, and media. I set out to put together the fastest AM2 system I could buy today (ridiculously expensive FX chips notwithstanding). That ended up being an Athlon64 X2 4600+. That's right - the 5000+ and 4800+ parts were nowhere to be seen, even though they launched last May. The retail channel is just starting to get 4800+'s in stock, so the 5000+'s can't be far behind. To round out our AMD system, we went with an Asus motherboard based on NVIDIA's 570 Ultra chipset. Unfortunately I ended up buying my X2 just before the price drops occured... So I paid about $550 USD, while they are now going for around $255-260. Ugh.
Finally, I had major issues with the beta BIOS on the Intel test motherboard. For some reason, the board would no longer POST either of the Core 2 processors after having a Pentium-D installed in it. No matter what I tried, it wouldn't do it. I only had one option - wait for Core 2 to officially launch, and use a production BIOS. Finally, all testing is complete, and I'm ready to report about Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme.
The codenames for the new desktop parts are "Conroe" "Conroe XE" and the lesser-known "Allendale". For the retail market, they are called "Core 2 Duo" and "Core 2 Extreme", even though this is actually their first CPU based on Core, desktop or otherwise.
Conroe and Allendale are identical, except Allendale comes with half the amount of L2 cache - 2MB instead of 4MB. Conroe XE is identical to Conroe, except that it has an unlocked multiplier.
The two Allendale based processors are the E6300, which runs at 1.86 GHz, and the E6400, which runs at 2.13 GHz. The Conroe parts are the E6600 and E6700 which run at 2.40 GHz and 2.67 GHz respectively. Finally, there is the Conroe XE based Core 2 Extreme, which is identical to all other Conroe processors in every way - it's just clocked higher and has an unlocked multiplier. The top Core 2 Extreme (and Intel's top processor of all) is the X6800, which runs at 2.93 GHz.
All of the aforementioned processors run on a quad-pumped 1066 MHz FSB.
The mobile part is codenamed "Merom" and was quietly launched alongside Conroe. It too is called "Core 2 Duo" and "Core 2 Solo" in retail; frontside bus is limited to 667 MHz on these low power-using parts, rather than 1066 MHz. Confused? No kidding.
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 - Quad-Core Power for Desktops
Intel's Core 2 Duo processor family bearing the new Core microarchitecture broke new grounds when it was launched a scant four months ago, catapulting Intel back into the driver's seat of the microprocessor industry, a 'show hand' that arch-rival AMD has yet to deliver a response till date. Despite the rave journalistic buzz however, the Core 2 Duo is still a dual-core processor and dual-core processors themselves aren't anything new (Intel's Pentium D and AMD's Athlon 64 X2 have been around since early 2005), not to mention that three and a half months is hardly enough time for the Core 2 Duo to really penetrate the retail channels.
The news that have been most anticipated within tech circles however, has been the talk of Intel's upcoming quad-core part, codenamed Kentsfield. During the recent IDF Fall 2006, Intel confirmed the launch and we were even given the opportunity for a hands-on performance preview, which you can check out here . Today, Kentsfield becomes official. Quad-core processing has indeed arrived in the consumer space as Intel increases its leadership position even more.
The official name of the Kentsfield series will be Core 2 Quad in the mainstream segment and the Core 2 Extreme in the enthusiast segment. The first Kentsfield processor to be available at launch will start with the top-end 2.66GHz Core 2 Extreme QX6700 priced at US$999, which is the same as the 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme X6800 during its launch. The QX6700 will be followed by the mainstream 2.4GHz Core 2 Quad Q6600, tentatively set to be released first quarter of 2007 and rumored to be priced around US$851. Whether the corresponding Core 2 Duo processors will receive price cuts remain to be seen as nothing has been announced yet.
This naming convention is based on the fact that the Kentsfield processors are in the same generation as the dual-core Conroe and Allendale - hence, 'Core 2' designates the processor series and the 'Duo' or 'Quad' suffix designating the number of cores. What may be initially confusing however is that both Conroe and Kentsfield enthusiast parts will be named Core 2 Extreme. For these processors, the CPU model numbers give away its pedigree. Those with a 'Q' prefix are quad-core models, eg. Core 2 Extreme QX6700
The news that have been most anticipated within tech circles however, has been the talk of Intel's upcoming quad-core part, codenamed Kentsfield. During the recent IDF Fall 2006, Intel confirmed the launch and we were even given the opportunity for a hands-on performance preview, which you can check out here . Today, Kentsfield becomes official. Quad-core processing has indeed arrived in the consumer space as Intel increases its leadership position even more.
The official name of the Kentsfield series will be Core 2 Quad in the mainstream segment and the Core 2 Extreme in the enthusiast segment. The first Kentsfield processor to be available at launch will start with the top-end 2.66GHz Core 2 Extreme QX6700 priced at US$999, which is the same as the 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme X6800 during its launch. The QX6700 will be followed by the mainstream 2.4GHz Core 2 Quad Q6600, tentatively set to be released first quarter of 2007 and rumored to be priced around US$851. Whether the corresponding Core 2 Duo processors will receive price cuts remain to be seen as nothing has been announced yet.
This naming convention is based on the fact that the Kentsfield processors are in the same generation as the dual-core Conroe and Allendale - hence, 'Core 2' designates the processor series and the 'Duo' or 'Quad' suffix designating the number of cores. What may be initially confusing however is that both Conroe and Kentsfield enthusiast parts will be named Core 2 Extreme. For these processors, the CPU model numbers give away its pedigree. Those with a 'Q' prefix are quad-core models, eg. Core 2 Extreme QX6700
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
