New Pentium Core 2 Processor
Discussion
I have core duo (not core 2 like yours...) all processor reviews say the core 2 duos are amazing (depending on how much you spend obviously) anyway to the point...
I have 2.16Ghz core duo, 2Gb 633mhz ram and 512mhz 7900gtx... I run most games at 1600x1200 and graphics set to high with AAx4 and Afx8. (Very good if that doesnt mean anything to you)
I have 2.16Ghz core duo, 2Gb 633mhz ram and 512mhz 7900gtx... I run most games at 1600x1200 and graphics set to high with AAx4 and Afx8. (Very good if that doesnt mean anything to you)
petros said:
Just ordered a new Computer from Evesham Computers with the new Pentium Core 2 Processor and an Nvidea 512 mb 7900 GTX Graphics card. Have read the blurb and it sounds fast, is it going to be much faster than my old Athlon 2600 card running an asus 9550 card?
Careful. You've either got a Pentium, or you've got a Core Duo, but you've not got a Pentium Core anything. The Pentiums are considerably crappier than the Core processors. Might be worth a call to see exactly what it is they're selling you.
rfisher said:
Excuse my ignorance but is a dual core processor what we used to call in the old days a twin processor?
Or is there 1 cpu using 2 instruction sets and serial processing?
Or should I ask a young person with acne or something?
Or is there 1 cpu using 2 instruction sets and serial processing?
Or should I ask a young person with acne or something?
It's a single die with two processing cores on it. They're connected with great cleverness. Effectively, it's two processors.
bez_uk said:
Did you order Solar Xtreme GTX? that has amazing processor, graphics and sound. Fails to mention how much memory it has tho with is worrying. cos you ought to have about 2Gb DDR2 at 1000mhz+ which in itself is pricy.
No, ordered the Solar plus, checked all the benchmark test results and the £500 price difference didn't seem justified.The £500 is the difference between really good processor and almost top of the line... you probably made a wise choice.
the 4mb L2 cache will make a very noticable difference. I'm not spotty enough to tell you in detail why but once I had a 1.7Ghz pentium 4 with 256Kb L2... felt about half the speed of my dad's 1.7Ghz Pentium M with 1Mb L2.
The extra is great for games and multimedia stuff when your processor is thinking like crazy (ie dvd encoding and general video transcoding). AMD dont even have 2Mb but thats probably the main reason their chips were always cheaper... apparently not the case anymore.
the 4mb L2 cache will make a very noticable difference. I'm not spotty enough to tell you in detail why but once I had a 1.7Ghz pentium 4 with 256Kb L2... felt about half the speed of my dad's 1.7Ghz Pentium M with 1Mb L2.
The extra is great for games and multimedia stuff when your processor is thinking like crazy (ie dvd encoding and general video transcoding). AMD dont even have 2Mb but thats probably the main reason their chips were always cheaper... apparently not the case anymore.
AMD's comeback is in the form of quadcore style fx 62's apparently... will take some beatting obviously but seems a rubbish way of thinking to me. 2 dualcore intel xeon's already power the mac pro! I think intel is definitly the one to go for at the mo. the core 2 is 64bit aswell isn't it? That's the only minor downside to my core (1) duo.
petros said:
fx 62 was thrashed by the 6800 extreme core 2 in all games and at all settings. It struggled to get anywhere near the 6700 which I've ordered.
True but the Quad core is due in 2007. Intel are at the stage AMD were last year - i.e. their processors are one jump ahead. The existing AMD processors are still worth considering in a bang to buck equation.
petros said:
Typed amd versus pentium core 2 into google and the amd is absolutely thrashed by the pentium. Even the newest amd chip can't get neat the core 2 6700 when playing games.
It's not a Pentium 
It's Core 2 Duo or Core 2 Extreme, no Pentium in there. You've already be told once
AMD need a new core realy to keep up with the core 2 's. Intel lucked out with that design though, its effectivly a mobile chip design that their Israil team put together and wasnt on the roadmap a while ago. The code 2's are two core single threaded (i.e. no hyperthreading)
AMD's quad cores will run well for multithreaded apps but still wont do that well in sinlge therad apps.
Intel have regained the crown after a long time in 2nd place, which was to be expected, but now AMD have a larger market share and inroads into the server/corporate market, were all winners from this.
AMD's quad cores will run well for multithreaded apps but still wont do that well in sinlge therad apps.
Intel have regained the crown after a long time in 2nd place, which was to be expected, but now AMD have a larger market share and inroads into the server/corporate market, were all winners from this.
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff