Processing speed question!

Discussion in 'Dell' started by Annie, Oct 4, 2006.

  1. Annie

    Annie Guest

    The new dual cores are 2.0 GHZ, while the single core is 2.8 GHZ. Do they
    run at comparable speeds or is the Dual core 2.0 just as fast or faster? I
    know there is a lot of debate whether one would benefit from a dual core in
    the first place. My main objective is for gaming.

    Thanks for your input!
    Annie, Oct 4, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Annie

    Tom Scales Guest

    The Core 2 Duo at 2.0 is significantly faster than the single core 2.8 (or
    even dual core 2.8).

    For example, using this chart, the 2.13 Core 2 Duo (the 2.0 isn't in the
    chart) gets a score of 5489.
    The single core 2.8 scores 3522.
    The dual core 2.8 scores only 4661 or 4705 depending on which dual core.

    The fastest is the Core 2 Duo EX6800 at 7547 while the fastest AMD is 5755.
    There are six Intel's faster than the AMD.

    http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=463&model2=433&chart=171

    Tom
    "Annie" <> wrote in message
    news:VWHUg.1489$...
    > The new dual cores are 2.0 GHZ, while the single core is 2.8 GHZ. Do they
    > run at comparable speeds or is the Dual core 2.0 just as fast or faster?
    > I know there is a lot of debate whether one would benefit from a dual core
    > in the first place. My main objective is for gaming.
    >
    > Thanks for your input!
    >
    Tom Scales, Oct 4, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Annie

    S.Lewis Guest

    "Annie" <> wrote in message
    news:VWHUg.1489$...
    > The new dual cores are 2.0 GHZ, while the single core is 2.8 GHZ. Do they
    > run at comparable speeds or is the Dual core 2.0 just as fast or faster?
    > I know there is a lot of debate whether one would benefit from a dual core
    > in the first place. My main objective is for gaming.
    >
    > Thanks for your input!
    >


    My general understanding this that for multi=tasks the dual cores tend to
    shine, but that in gaming they are actually inferior.

    I would launch a google search on dual core with the name(s) of the games
    you intend to run. Read the forums and see what people who're actually
    gaming with them are saying.

    My information is anecdotal but came from a friend who games extensively
    with a home-built AMD64 single core. He wanted to "upgrade", but did not
    after quite a bit of reading on the subject.

    Stew
    S.Lewis, Oct 4, 2006
    #3
  4. Annie

    Tom Scales Guest

    "S.Lewis" <> wrote in message
    news:N1NUg.33157$...
    >
    > "Annie" <> wrote in message
    > news:VWHUg.1489$...
    >> The new dual cores are 2.0 GHZ, while the single core is 2.8 GHZ. Do
    >> they run at comparable speeds or is the Dual core 2.0 just as fast or
    >> faster? I know there is a lot of debate whether one would benefit from a
    >> dual core in the first place. My main objective is for gaming.
    >>
    >> Thanks for your input!
    >>

    >
    > My general understanding this that for multi=tasks the dual cores tend to
    > shine, but that in gaming they are actually inferior.
    >
    > I would launch a google search on dual core with the name(s) of the games
    > you intend to run. Read the forums and see what people who're actually
    > gaming with them are saying.
    >
    > My information is anecdotal but came from a friend who games extensively
    > with a home-built AMD64 single core. He wanted to "upgrade", but did not
    > after quite a bit of reading on the subject.
    >
    > Stew
    >


    I would believe that of the early dual cores, but the top of the line Core 2
    Duo?
    Tom Scales, Oct 4, 2006
    #4
  5. Annie

    Colin Wilson Guest

    > I would believe that of the early dual cores, but the top of the line Core 2
    > Duo?


    Wouldn't it depend on the code being executed i.e. if a game has been
    written to take advantage of dual cores ? - most are not AFAIK, which
    means you would be running at a single core speed of, in this instance,
    2Ghz
    Colin Wilson, Oct 4, 2006
    #5
  6. Annie

    Tom Scales Guest

    "Colin Wilson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >> I would believe that of the early dual cores, but the top of the line
    >> Core 2
    >> Duo?

    >
    > Wouldn't it depend on the code being executed i.e. if a game has been
    > written to take advantage of dual cores ? - most are not AFAIK, which
    > means you would be running at a single core speed of, in this instance,
    > 2Ghz


    I agree, but the game isn't the only running. Your AV, XP itself, etc.,
    etc.

    On the new Core 2 Duo, even one of the processors is blindingly fast.

    Tom
    Tom Scales, Oct 4, 2006
    #6
  7. Annie

    S.Lewis Guest

    "Tom Scales" <> wrote in message
    news:lONUg.27697$...
    >
    > "S.Lewis" <> wrote in message
    > news:N1NUg.33157$...
    >>
    >> "Annie" <> wrote in message
    >> news:VWHUg.1489$...
    >>> The new dual cores are 2.0 GHZ, while the single core is 2.8 GHZ. Do
    >>> they run at comparable speeds or is the Dual core 2.0 just as fast or
    >>> faster? I know there is a lot of debate whether one would benefit from a
    >>> dual core in the first place. My main objective is for gaming.
    >>>
    >>> Thanks for your input!
    >>>

    >>
    >> My general understanding this that for multi=tasks the dual cores tend to
    >> shine, but that in gaming they are actually inferior.
    >>
    >> I would launch a google search on dual core with the name(s) of the games
    >> you intend to run. Read the forums and see what people who're actually
    >> gaming with them are saying.
    >>
    >> My information is anecdotal but came from a friend who games extensively
    >> with a home-built AMD64 single core. He wanted to "upgrade", but did not
    >> after quite a bit of reading on the subject.
    >>
    >> Stew
    >>

    >
    > I would believe that of the early dual cores, but the top of the line Core
    > 2 Duo?
    >
    >


    Don't know about the Core2's. His comment was about the dual core AMD and
    Core Duo Intel chips.

    Stew
    S.Lewis, Oct 4, 2006
    #7
  8. Annie

    User N Guest

    "Annie" <> wrote in message news:VWHUg.1489$...
    > The new dual cores are 2.0 GHZ, while the single core is 2.8 GHZ. []


    Others have provided you with some info, but just so there is no confusion,
    specifically which processors are you referring to and considering?
    User N, Oct 5, 2006
    #8
  9. Annie

    Annie Guest

    "User N" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "Annie" <> wrote in message
    > news:VWHUg.1489$...


    >> The new dual cores are 2.0 GHZ, while the single core is 2.8 GHZ.

    >
    > Others have provided you with some info, but just so there is no
    > confusion,
    > specifically which processors are you referring to and considering?


    I'm looking at everything at this point. Hoping to replace my 1.4 ghz
    laptop. That's why I needed to ask about the '2.0' because by the old
    system that wouldn't be much of an upgrade... Now, I understand it is. I
    wasn't even aware of the Core 2 Duo before this. I'm guessing that's pricey
    and fairly new but it sounds like that's what I'll want to look into next.

    Thanks for asking...and to all that answered! :)
    Annie, Oct 5, 2006
    #9
  10. Annie

    Jay B Guest

    i'm pushing all my customers to core 2!!
    i just got my first batch in and they are terrific, better than the core
    duo i've been selling. a noticable difference to me.
    prices arent that bad.
    just resist the temptation to buy the others when the prices on them
    start dropping!


    Annie wrote:
    > "User N" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> "Annie" <> wrote in message
    >> news:VWHUg.1489$...

    >
    >>> The new dual cores are 2.0 GHZ, while the single core is 2.8 GHZ.

    >> Others have provided you with some info, but just so there is no
    >> confusion,
    >> specifically which processors are you referring to and considering?

    >
    > I'm looking at everything at this point. Hoping to replace my 1.4 ghz
    > laptop. That's why I needed to ask about the '2.0' because by the old
    > system that wouldn't be much of an upgrade... Now, I understand it is. I
    > wasn't even aware of the Core 2 Duo before this. I'm guessing that's pricey
    > and fairly new but it sounds like that's what I'll want to look into next.
    >
    > Thanks for asking...and to all that answered! :)
    >
    >
    Jay B, Oct 5, 2006
    #10
  11. Annie

    User N Guest

    "Annie" <> wrote in message news:8j1Vg.7559$...

    > I'm looking at everything at this point. Hoping to replace my 1.4 ghz
    > laptop.


    .... with a notebook or desktop?

    > [] I wasn't even aware of the Core 2 Duo before this. I'm guessing that's
    > pricey and fairly new but it sounds like that's what I'll want to look into next.


    FWIW there are Intel Core 2 Duo mobile processors, Intel Core 2 Duo
    desktop processors, and Intel Core 2 Extreme desktop processors. There
    are differences in not only clock rate but the amount of L2 cache and front
    side bus speed so you have to pay attention when it comes to benchmarks.
    Generally speaking one wouldn't compare mobile processors to desktop
    processors and vice versa.

    The Core 2 line offers top performance in both the mobile and desktop arenas
    and the prices aren't bad so you indeed should look at them regardless of your
    application. Remember, if you'll be Gaming you will need to budget for at least
    1GB of RAM and a higher-end video card. If the price gets too high you can
    look at and ask about other processors from Intel and AMD.
    User N, Oct 5, 2006
    #11
  12. Annie

    Annie Guest

    "Jay B" <> wrote in message
    news:0p1Vg.1307$...
    > i'm pushing all my customers to core 2!!
    > i just got my first batch in and they are terrific, better than the core
    > duo i've been selling. a noticable difference to me.
    > prices arent that bad.


    Okay, now I'm confused! There is a Core 2 AND a Core Duo?

    To User N: I'm looking for a laptop (and I'm always careful to get decent
    video)
    Annie, Oct 5, 2006
    #12
  13. Annie

    Tom Scales Guest

    "Annie" <> wrote in message
    news:8XeVg.19806$...
    >
    > "Jay B" <> wrote in message
    > news:0p1Vg.1307$...
    >> i'm pushing all my customers to core 2!!
    >> i just got my first batch in and they are terrific, better than the core
    >> duo i've been selling. a noticable difference to me.
    >> prices arent that bad.

    >
    > Okay, now I'm confused! There is a Core 2 AND a Core Duo?
    >
    > To User N: I'm looking for a laptop (and I'm always careful to get decent
    > video)
    >


    Actually, there is a

    Core Solo
    Core Duo

    Which have been replaced by

    Core 2 Solo
    Core 2 Duo
    Tom Scales, Oct 5, 2006
    #13
  14. Annie

    S.Lewis Guest

    "Tom Scales" <> wrote in message
    news:ZmfVg.3771$...
    >
    > "Annie" <> wrote in message
    > news:8XeVg.19806$...
    >>
    >> "Jay B" <> wrote in message
    >> news:0p1Vg.1307$...
    >>> i'm pushing all my customers to core 2!!
    >>> i just got my first batch in and they are terrific, better than the core
    >>> duo i've been selling. a noticable difference to me.
    >>> prices arent that bad.

    >>
    >> Okay, now I'm confused! There is a Core 2 AND a Core Duo?
    >>
    >> To User N: I'm looking for a laptop (and I'm always careful to get
    >> decent video)
    >>

    >
    > Actually, there is a
    >
    > Core Solo
    > Core Duo
    >
    > Which have been replaced by
    >
    > Core 2 Solo
    > Core 2 Duo
    >
    >
    >


    And I'd like to personally thank Intel for clearing up the confusion.
    S.Lewis, Oct 5, 2006
    #14
  15. Annie

    User N Guest

    "Annie" <> wrote in message news:8XeVg.19806$...
    >
    > "Jay B" <> wrote in message
    > news:0p1Vg.1307$...
    >> i'm pushing all my customers to core 2!!
    >> i just got my first batch in and they are terrific, better than the core
    >> duo i've been selling. a noticable difference to me.
    >> prices arent that bad.

    >
    > Okay, now I'm confused! There is a Core 2 AND a Core Duo?


    There are Intel "Core" and "Core 2" processors. The "Core" processors
    ("Solo" for single core, "Duo" for dual core) were only released as mobile
    processors and are still being sold. The "Core 2" processors are of a
    newer architecture and have been released in both mobile and desktop
    versions. There is no Core 2 Solo yet. If you are currently looking for a
    mobile processor for CPU intensive tasks, you'd want to focus on dual
    cores and specifically Core Duo, Core 2 Duo, and I might as well mention
    the AMD Turion X2 (which Dell has yet to offer in notebooks).

    FWIW, here is one comparison of Core Duo and Core 2 Duo:

    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808&p=1

    You can dig up other comparisons on your own, if you like.


    > To User N: I'm looking for a laptop (and I'm always careful to get decent
    > video)


    OK, just making sure everyone is on the same page:)
    User N, Oct 6, 2006
    #15
  16. Annie

    Annie Guest

    "User N" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "Annie" <> wrote in message
    > news:8j1Vg.7559$...
    >
    >> I'm looking at everything at this point. Hoping to replace my 1.4 ghz
    >> laptop.

    >
    > ... with a notebook or desktop?
    >
    >>[] I wasn't even aware of the Core 2 Duo before this. I'm guessing that's
    >> pricey and fairly new but it sounds like that's what I'll want to look
    >> into next.

    >
    > FWIW there are Intel Core 2 Duo mobile processors, Intel Core 2 Duo
    > desktop processors, and Intel Core 2 Extreme desktop processors. There
    > are differences in not only clock rate but the amount of L2 cache and
    > front
    > side bus speed so you have to pay attention when it comes to benchmarks.
    > Generally speaking one wouldn't compare mobile processors to desktop
    > processors and vice versa.
    >
    > The Core 2 line offers top performance in both the mobile and desktop
    > arenas
    > and the prices aren't bad so you indeed should look at them regardless of
    > your
    > application. Remember, if you'll be Gaming you will need to budget for at
    > least
    > 1GB of RAM and a higher-end video card. If the price gets too high you
    > can
    > look at and ask about other processors from Intel and AMD.


    User N: In case you missed my previous note, I'm looking for a laptop.
    And, yes, I always get a decent video card...silly not to! Thank you for
    all your input! What brand would you look at? Dell only? :) I often do
    my comparison shopping/review-studying through CNet.

    Thanks to all that helped with my processor confusion!
    Annie, Oct 6, 2006
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. rstlne

    Re: music processing machine

    rstlne, Aug 5, 2003, in forum: Asus
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    276
    rstlne
    Aug 5, 2003
  2. Ghostrider

    Re: music processing machine

    Ghostrider, Aug 5, 2003, in forum: Asus
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    267
    Ghostrider
    Aug 5, 2003
  3. Ben Pope

    Re: music processing machine

    Ben Pope, Aug 5, 2003, in forum: Asus
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    262
    Ben Pope
    Aug 5, 2003
  4. NewToFPGA
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    643
    CBFalconer
    Jan 21, 2008
  5. Rick
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    211
Loading...

Share This Page