Core Duo 2.0GHz vs Core 2 Duo 1.66GHz

[boybi]

anong mas magandang performance between the 2?

[A121]

syempre core 2 duo...

mas bago at efficient yung architecture ng core 2 duo compared sa core duo.

please read it here -> http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=2808

[batang_raon14]

Sir boybi,

Don't mind the X.XGHz where X.X=clock speed. We have better comparison charts like PR ratings to efficiently compare 2 CPU's. Opinion ko lang po. By wrong tradition po kasi most of us tend to believe na this particular processor is bang-for-the-buck since it has a higher GHz rating than the other processor (and even lower price at times) when it actually isn't. HTH.

[mikmik316]

i beg to disagree... binasa ko yan before at mejo hindi maayos ang specs na nasa anandtech kasi he is comparing a Core 2 Duo with a 4Mb Cache and a Core Duo with 2Mb Cache... it was pinpointed out that because of the larger cache kaya may gain sa performance ang Core 2 Duo...

Now if we talk a Core 2 Duo 1.6Ghz with 2Mb Cache versus a Core Duo 2.0Ghz with 2Mb Cache... Ang lamang lang ng Core 2 Duo model na ito based on my research is the 64-bit capability... hindi sinama ng Intel ang hardware based virtualization technology nito at parehas pa silang 667Mhz ang FSB...

So in terms of speed mas mabilis pa rin ang Core Duo 2.0.... Now if you will compare it to the Core 2 Duo 2.0Ghz with 4Mb Cache then mas mabilis ang later pero mas mahal...

From what I see right now pricing of the Core 2 Duo 1.6 is the same as the Core Duo 1.86... and the Core 2 Duo 1.86 is the same as the Core Duo 2.0 in terms of processor pricing... better bang for the buck and Core 2 Duo 1.86Ghz processor because it has the feature set of Core Duo + 64 bit + Virtualization Technology.... Now the cheapest Core 2 Duo which will give you the maximum performance & feature set will be the 2.0Ghz version with 4Mb Cache... Pero syempre lagpas pricing nito sa Core 2 Duo 1.86 / Core Duo 2.0...

[mikmik316]

Sir boybi,

Don't mind the X.XGHz where X.X=clock speed. We have better comparison charts like PR ratings to efficiently compare 2 CPU's. Opinion ko lang po. By wrong tradition po kasi most of us tend to believe na this particular processor is bang-for-the-buck since it has a higher GHz rating than the other processor (and even lower price at times) when it actually isn't. HTH.

The PR rating is justified if you want to compare the Netburst architecture of Pentium 4 at Pentium D sa Athlon pero ngayong Core 2 Duo na saka Athlon X2/ Turion X2... they can be compared in pure Megahertz... Kung papansinin mo Core 2 Duo Ghz ay between 1.6Ghz to 2.33Ghz... ang Athlon X2 /Turion X2dyan naglalaro ang Ghz between 1.8Ghz at 2.2Ghz.. at saka sa lahat ng Benchmark lampaso ng Lowly Core 2 Duo 1.66/1.83Ghz CPU ang lahat ng Athlon X2 Turion X2 hanggang 4800+... Pati mga Pentium D 3.4Ghz na model 945 taob lahat...

[batang_raon14]

i beg to disagree... binasa ko yan before at mejo hindi maayos ang specs na nasa anandtech kasi he is comparing a Core 2 Duo with a 4Mb Cache and a Core Duo with 2Mb Cache... it was pinpointed out that because of the larger cache kaya may gain sa performance ang Core 2 Duo...

Based on the review, the article gave much bias to what the Core 2 Duo could offer. Dunno, but they surely do help in keeping the marketing strategies of these CPU-makers go well with the trend of consumers buying and buying in a never-ending upgrade of processors.

From what I see right now pricing of the Core 2 Duo 1.6 is the same as the Core Duo 1.86... and the Core 2 Duo 1.86 is the same as the Core Duo 2.0 in terms of processor pricing... better bang for the buck and Core 2 Duo 1.86Ghz processor because it has the feature set of Core Duo + 64 bit + Virtualization Technology.... Now the cheapest Core 2 Duo which will give you the maximum performance & feature set will be the 2.0Ghz version with 4Mb Cache... Pero syempre lagpas pricing nito sa Core 2 Duo 1.86 / Core Duo 2.0...

Which is why reviews biased to a newer processor has to be made. So the demand for the new product will go up, and as the demand for the older product goes down, same shall go with its price.

I dunno when there will ever be a "perfect" processor or better yet a "perfect" computer. They just keep on making more and more of them these days. It started out with the battle for the higher clock ratios, then with the higher FSB's, then the battle for the dual core, and now battle for the higher cache. Sheesh... there are even points when consumers no longer want to upgrade because they've been constantly doing it ever since they started needing PC's in their homes, companies, etc....

[batang_raon14]

The PR rating is justified if you want to compare the Netburst architecture of Pentium 4 at Pentium D sa Athlon pero ngayong Core 2 Duo na saka Athlon X2/ Turion X2... they can be compared in pure Megahertz... Kung papansinin mo Core 2 Duo Ghz ay between 1.6Ghz to 2.33Ghz... ang Athlon X2 /Turion X2dyan naglalaro ang Ghz between 1.8Ghz at 2.2Ghz.. at saka sa lahat ng Benchmark lampaso ng Lowly Core 2 Duo 1.66/1.83Ghz CPU ang lahat ng Athlon X2 Turion X2 hanggang 4800+... Pati mga Pentium D 3.4Ghz na model 945 taob lahat...

I stand corrected with regards to the PR rating. But, with the benchmarking, nada. I don't know why people give too much of their attention in 5-30points difference when the typical business-type consumer won't even feel it when they do their paperwork. In gaming, video-processing/editing, encoding, or other CPU-consuming tasks perhaps.

Other than the speeds of the processors and its cache, factors such as processor's average operating temperature, architecture, power consumption, etc., has to be given due regards. This goes especially to those into notebook aka laptop computers.

And yes, lampaso nga ng Core 2 Duo ang lahat ng processors na pwede mong mabanggit, pero ung presyo ng better half niya eh kayang-kaya ring lampasuhin ang aking pera. Deeming it impractical for the time-being. And, pag nagmura na, tiyak may bago na namang processor na mas malupit jan. Di po ba?

[mikmik316]

I think you should have read very well the review as it was not biased at all... They even said that Core 2 Duo needs this X amount of transistors just to outduel the Core Duo... Dig deep further to the review and it said that Core 2 Duo will shine if it has an FSB of 800Mhz...

So I guess you are not lending enough of your technical know how to the one asking the question and just reading the Intro and Conclusion of the review??????

If you really want to be paranoid of spending too much money on technology then being obsolete for just a few months... i want everyone to know that for Q1 2007, they will incorporate WiMax or Wireless-N, 3.5G into the chipsets... and also a new socket for Core 2 Duos and a Newer Core 2 Duo version 2.0.... which means bagsak ulit ang presyo ng mga hi-end laptops offered at this point..

Moral of the story???? Get just what you need and of course the most bang for the buck... which I guess I'm doing now to help the threadstarter...

[batang_raon14]

I think you should have read very well the review as it was not biased at all... They even said that Core 2 Duo needs this X amount of transistors just to outduel the Core Duo... Dig deep further to the review and it said that Core 2 Duo will shine if it has an FSB of 800Mhz...

When I meant "biased" sir, I simply meant that the review was much leaning to the newer processor compared to the latter. This is normal with any review of a product that is expected to compete with a relatively "previous" product.

I already lent my technical-know-how to the thread starter sir the moment I mentioned this:

Deeming it impractical for the time-being.

Now, my opinion is that current business applications (like MS Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc.), do not need much of the CPU's advanced features to load it. Even the old P3's with 800-1000MHz could load it easily.

It is also written sir in the review that using laptops for gaming purposes are still similar to how it went years ago. You can't just really find a laptop that can play games as fast as desktops. And the chances that a customer will buy a laptop exclusively for gaming is at a 1 out of 10.

Yeah, pretty soon WiMax will be incorporated, and like you said

which means bagsak ulit ang presyo ng mga hi-end laptops offered at this point..

... Since you stated this, I could assume that just like me, you were also going for the practicality of things. Am I right sir? Because if I were to say, that's the main focus of my posts. IMHO lang po.

[badkuk]

most of the time, tinatamad akong tignan ung nitty-gritty details; i just ask myself what i would be doing 70-80% of the time with the pc i intend to buy, take a look at the application benchmarks, and make a decision based on that.

[RafRaf]

Something to think about....

Core 2 Duo = two Core Duo chips in a single package

EDIT: Core 2 Duo EXTREME = two Core 2 Duo chips in a single package
EDIT: Core 2 Duo = second gen dual core after Core Duo
EDIT: Sorry my bad.

I think the benefits of Core 2 Duo are generally less power consumption and more parallelism (very good for gaming or running 50 excel macros at the same time or running video+music+application+download+game at the same time).

If you run only 1 excel macro on either Core 2 Duo or Core Duo the difference, if any, isn't really that significant imho.

So how do you plan to use your system?

[boybi]

i did not ask the question to decide which to buy as i've already bought one around 2 weeks ago (core 2 duo). i asked the question just to know if there really is a significant difference in performance between the two processors. the price difference between a core duo 2ghz and a core 2 duo at 1.66ghz, as i recall, is minimal. so i like to know if i made the right choice in getting a newer processor, albeit at a lower speed.

[boybi]

mali yata ito?

Something to think about....

Core 2 Duo = two Core Duo chips in a single package

[mikmik316]

When I meant "biased" sir, I simply meant that the review was much leaning to the newer processor compared to the latter. This is normal with any review of a product that is expected to compete with a relatively "previous" product.

I already lent my technical-know-how to the thread starter sir the moment I mentioned this:

Now, my opinion is that current business applications (like MS Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc.), do not need much of the CPU's advanced features to load it. Even the old P3's with 800-1000MHz could load it easily.

It is also written sir in the review that using laptops for gaming purposes are still similar to how it went years ago. You can't just really find a laptop that can play games as fast as desktops. And the chances that a customer will buy a laptop exclusively for gaming is at a 1 out of 10.

Yeah, pretty soon WiMax will be incorporated, and like you said ... Since you stated this, I could assume that just like me, you were also going for the practicality of things. Am I right sir? Because if I were to say, that's the main focus of my posts. IMHO lang po.

Wow i think you missed the point of buying Core 2 Duo & Core Duo laptops... R u ripping MP3 files sir? R u doing some kind of picture editing? R u doing simple photo videos? if yes then i guess you will benefit on using laptopns based on Intel Core Micro architecture... Sa buhay natin ngayon na kailangan matapos lahat ng mga bagay ng mabilis like spread sheet calculations, MP3 decoding encoding, at gawa ng Photo Stories... siguro naman you will not stick with your P3 processor right????

Ever tried doing pivot tables with 65,000 lines of data???? Plus running a Macro? I guess you haven't tried that that's why you cannot appreciate having true processing power....

And of course there is the pending upgrade to Windows Vista which demands so much processing power because its kernel is based on Windows Server 2003... Come on if you have the money to buy speed then you should start buying it now... Coz even PC World & PC Mag have said that processing power is much needed now that we are running anti-virus, anti-spyware, firewall, instant messengers that are memory hogs, some games on the side, audio, video, photo editing, and of course your trusty Microsoft Word...

If you cannot cope up with the multi tasking demands of computing & everyday life then I guess go stick with your AMD K3-650s and Pentium 3 800s...

[mikmik316]

mali yata ito?

Mejo tama din yan sir... may Quad-Core na ang pangalan ay Core 2 Duo Extreme something something... bobo nga ng Intel e... di pa tinawag na Core 2 Quadro para tapos na...

[mikmik316]

i did not ask the question to decide which to buy as i've already bought one around 2 weeks ago (core 2 duo). i asked the question just to know if there really is a significant difference in performance between the two processors. the price difference between a core duo 2ghz and a core 2 duo at 1.66ghz, as i recall, is minimal. so i like to know if i made the right choice in getting a newer processor, albeit at a lower speed.

In my opinion sir based on processing power... sa Core Duo 2Ghz na lang ako... at nasabi ko na rin ang reasons based sa sinabi ko sa taas... kasi the Core 2 Duo 1.6 Ghz is the same as the Core Duo 1.6 Ghz. Same L2 cache, same FSB, only difference is 64-bit option. Wala pang Hardware Virtualization...

[batang_raon14]

i did not ask the question to decide which to buy as i've already bought one around 2 weeks ago (core 2 duo). i asked the question just to know if there really is a significant difference in performance between the two processors. the price difference between a core duo 2ghz and a core 2 duo at 1.66ghz, as i recall, is minimal. so i like to know if i made the right choice in getting a newer processor, albeit at a lower speed.

Sir boybi and mikmik. Sorry, mukhang mali start ko. My apologies.

Anyways, it really depends sir to how you coin the term "significant". For serious PC gamers, 3 points less than the other could mean like P10000 reduced to P3000. For those using a computer just for the heck of typing and generally paper work, as long as it could load an application fast, then all is well. If you're the latter-type, there really isn't much of a difference IMO. But if you're the former, everything just has to be the best there is.

But to answer the question straight, I think sir mikmik gave the best answer there is:

Now if we talk a Core 2 Duo 1.6Ghz with 2Mb Cache versus a Core Duo 2.0Ghz with 2Mb Cache... Ang lamang lang ng Core 2 Duo model na ito based on my research is the 64-bit capability... hindi sinama ng Intel ang hardware based virtualization technology nito at parehas pa silang 667Mhz ang FSB...

and

So in terms of speed mas mabilis pa rin ang Core Duo 2.0.... Now if you will compare it to the Core 2 Duo 2.0Ghz with 4Mb Cache then mas mabilis ang later pero mas mahal...

Yun lang po. Good eve!

[batang_raon14]

Like I said mikmik, my apologies. Anyways, I have to admit I'm getting old. It's been a while since my priorities have shifted from computers to cars, so much of what I learn these days are on automobiles. I still upgrade my PC, but never at a rate as quick as the rate my salary arrives compared to before. But, I'll still give my comment, if I may:

Wow i think you missed the point of buying Core 2 Duo & Core Duo laptops... R u ripping MP3 files sir? R u doing some kind of picture editing? R u doing simple photo videos? if yes then i guess you will benefit on using laptops based on Intel Core Micro architecture... Sa buhay natin ngayon na kailangan matapos lahat ng mga bagay ng mabilis like spread sheet calculations, MP3 decoding encoding, at gawa ng Photo Stories... siguro naman you will not stick with your P3 processor right????

Yes, I rip MP3 files. But the quantity of what I rip is minimal. So personally the difference of the time to complete the task with the best processor in the market as of now wouldn't do wonders on me. Same goes with my simple video edits, maya designing, JAVA, etc.. I don't mind the wait. As long as the program does not crash, all is well on my side. Yes, there are deadlines, but it isn't necessarily that short to make you buy a new set of PC or laptop ASAP. My keystone is to start as soon as a project has been given at work. Haven't failed to submit before the deadline eversince.

And of course there is the pending upgrade to Windows Vista which demands so much processing power because its kernel is based on Windows Server 2003...

Yes, upgrade to Vista is on due. But I don't think a low-spec CPU of this generation couldn't do well on its platform. If I recall correctly, I read once in PCMag that same statement when Windows XP was about to be released then (high minimum requirements and all). And after 4 years, to my surprise, a PPC forumer posted a WinXP running well much lower than the minimum requirements issued by Microsoft for the OS itself.

Come on if you have the money to buy speed then you should start buying it now... Coz even PC World & PC Mag have said that processing power is much needed now that we are running anti-virus, anti-spyware, firewall, instant messengers that are memory hogs, some games on the side, audio, video, photo editing, and of course your trusty Microsoft Word...

Same, this is what they've long been saying since time eternal. But indeed, it is true. The newer things get, the higher its thirst for a better spec PC. Better CPU, higher RAM, improved video card, etc.. If I have the money, sure I would have started buying, but I can't upgrade continously as there are several expenses running around in the family besides buying PC parts.

If you cannot cope up with the multi tasking demands of computing & everyday life then I guess go stick with your AMD K3-650s and Pentium 3 800s...

Now I admitted I'm old, but not that old to the point that I still stick with a kopong-kopong CPU. The demands of computing may revolve around computers, but not everyday life. I can enjoy my daily jogs without multi-tasking, I can play chess and use my logic without hyper-threading my brain, I can draw my paintings in a canvass without the need for Smart Shaders, Anti-Aliasing, Anisotropic Filtering, etc.. So we can't just integrate one with the other.

but I really admire this statement of yours sir:

bobo nga ng Intel e...

I just love to hear that anytime of the day.

BTW, really, I'm getting old but not that old. hehe... like I said, I upgrade my PC but I prioritize my car for now. Here's my essential PC's specs:
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+
MSI K8N Neo4-Platinum
200GB Seagate SATA
2x 1GB PQI 667 DDR2
Gigabyte GeForce 7300GT 256mb 128bit
LG DVD-Writer GSAH20N
an LG 17" LCD and lastly pipitsuging modified IRock na casing modified by Tantric Modz.

Hope this clarifies things.

[mikmik316]

Hey sir don't think I have the best & latest... I still use right now my Pentium 4 1.8Ghz Northwood Processor + Intel 845G chipset + 1Gb DDR333 + Samsung PATA 80Gb + Sony DVD Combro Drive + 15 inch AOC LCD Monitor... Yeah I'm not a gamer & I just have a lowly myDSL 999 connection.... And all of my knowledge with Core 2 Duo came in because I'm building such systems for clients as well as our family will be buying soon a laptop... But as a PC System Builder... all I can say is that I have 10 years of experience and I have met every kind of customer who wants every kind of computer system but have stop them in making hasty conclusion and make them realize they are spending too much for processing power they don't need...

I would soon be a Mac convert... just waiting for Leopard + Core 2 Duo combination.....

[batang_raon14]

I see. Well, now I know and now I learn. Peace sir! :peace: