Dell Core 2 Duo fever - but why ?
(hopefully this message doesn't get tucked away in a quiet corner by the sysop...)
I'd like to solve this whole
Ok, so Dell has been starting to use the C2D chip in some of their configurations.
Right now, they way they're pricing it, you can't really get any "deal" on a C2D system, and you end up spending quite a bit more money to get it.
People seem to go all mushy and the
Look at the review right here on this website, about the e1505. It says it gets an about 10% (that TEN) percent speed increase. That's *NOT* a whole lot folks! That would means that a 2 GHz C1D would run FASTER than a 1.66 GHz C2D!
Don't believe Intel's yack for split second either. In real life, please leave it up to the normal ordinary laptop reviewers to find the *real* numbers. It's *very* simple. Run identical systems with different chips side by side, and see what happens.
Look at those super pi numbers. I'm comparing numbers from the 2 reviews of the e1505 (c2d & c1d ones).
1:02 vs 1:16 is a 23% increase. But look how the c2d is using 667 memory, and the c1d is using 533 memory.
Let's take the numbers from the e1705 review. Again, it's got 533 memory.
1:12. So the e1705 is about 6% faster than an equivalent e1505.
I'm probably missing something. But I'm trying to prove this C2D vs C2D thing.
So I can't seem to find any reviews that test a 2GHz C1D with 667 memory.
Here's something: Alienware Area-51 2.33GHz C2D 0:56.
So scale that down to a 2GHz (unscientific) = about 1:05.
Anyway. All these numbers are all awfully close together.
I do *NOT* think it's worth getting all hyper about. The C2D is a bit faster, not by that much. It's not worth shelling out 100's and 100's of extra $'s in my opinion.
If anyone is interested, we can get a little further with all this, round up some other numbers and evaluate this thing a little more accurate... Anyone?
Answer:
Re: Dell Core 2 Duo fever - but why ?
Full Windows Vista support. People are futureproofing themselves. Plain and simple, if you want the full Windows Vista experience you need to have 64bit processing. Not only that but if you examine pricing, you aren't paying much of a premium at all on equally clocked cpu's. the 2.0ghz Core Duo's were about the same price premium as the Core 2 Duo's.
This is the VERY FIRST mobile intel product that has 64bit support. Ever. So with it being brand new technology and a baby step forward, it's one of those "I CAN FINALLY SPEND SOME MONEY" moments. If I can wager a guess, a lot of people are like me and they like to get on board of technology right around and after the time it's updated, not when it's about to be updated.
For weeks it's been speculated when these brand new fancy chips would come out. It kept a lot of people from buying a laptop just to see exactly what was going on with these cpu's. Now they see they're slightly better performance, have better compatability, and are not super overpriced, a lot of people who were holding out are finally saying "OK YA GOT ME!".
Answer:
Re: Dell Core 2 Duo fever - but why ?
So you really want Vista? (Really?). XP Pro and Home are in there prime right now, and Vista is nothing but a bunch of graphical extras. I for sure will not switch as XP Home is great right now, and Linux will probably come on to my machine in some time.
To your 64-bit question, there are not really any programs at the moment now that fully utilize that capability, and even if you futureproof, the next and greatest will come out.(Santa Rosa anyone). Either Core Duo is just as good, so you wont be outdated for sometime.
I made the switch from a 1st gen P4 and went with Yonah, since I knew at anytime I could upgrade to Merom. That capability was one of the best things I ever did as it allows to prolong the life of my notebook easily.
Answer:
Re: Dell Core 2 Duo fever - but why ?
I concur completely with digitaltrav. It's not about the crazy better performance, it's about 64-bit, Vista, and the price. On the M90, the Core 2 Duo upgrades are the same price as the Yonah upgrades. Why wouldn't you get a Merom? Even if I had to pay more, I'd get it. 64-bit may not be great or even useful now, but it will be in the future. It's not like going to faster, dual-core processors, it's moving to an entirely different platform. 64 bit apps won't run on 32-bit chips. All apps will run on a single core processor, or a slower processor (provided it's not like 8 years old). But 64-bit apps will only run on 64-bit chips and 64-bit OS'. Vista is at heart a 64-bit OS. Yeah, Santa Rosa will be coming out and will be better, but that won't make the Merom obsolete. Merom will still be dual-core and 64-bit and will run apps for years to come, including the next-gen 64-bit apps. Yonah will not. So why not pay a VERY small premium?
@Bhatman. I just want to ask if you've used Vista. I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume you haven't, but please correct me if I'm wrong. Vista is not merely a UI upgrade of XP. That's what it may appear to be at first glance, and that may be it's downfall. But it's about more than that. It's got integrated search, better usability and different organization (sometimes good, sometimes bad), a multi-user OS, more security... it's not a glass window border around XP's kernel. If it were, it wouldn't have taken them 6 years to get it out.
Answer:
Re: Dell Core 2 Duo fever - but why ?
So you really want Vista? (Really?). XP Pro and Home are in there prime right now, and Vista is nothing but a bunch of graphical extras. I for sure will not switch as XP Home is great right now, and Linux will probably come on to my machine in some time.
To your 64-bit question, there are not really any programs at the moment now that fully utilize that capability, and even if you futureproof, the next and greatest will come out.(Santa Rosa anyone). Either Core Duo is just as good, so you wont be outdated for sometime.
I made the switch from a 1st gen P4 and went with Yonah, since I knew at anytime I could upgrade to Merom. That capability was one of the best things I ever did as it allows to prolong the life of my notebook easily. Most people like keeping technology around for a few years.
I'd say a year from now, there is a good chance that there will be a feature or two somewhere in Vista that will make most users want to upgrade. Sure it's a lot of graphical candy coating, but there are some useful additions under the hood as well. SuperFetch, ReadyBoost, Windows Backup, Improved Search, Sidebar/Gadgets, Improved Security, and plenty of others. All that with a candy coat slathered ontop of it.
Now, you are right about 64bit computing. Most applications aren't using it, and that is because there isn't a mainstream OS to run those applications on. 64bit XP was a failure from the start. The driver support wasn't there at all, and getting most computers working with XP64 would require more than your "average" computer user. Vista64 is going to be coming STANDARD on many many many many many systems you buy from the store. If you go to the best buy sales floor a year from now, you'd likely be hard pressed to find many 32bit versions of vista being demo'd. This is the kind of exposure 64bit computing needs to get the applications written to take advantage of them however possible.
Not only will Vista64 be mainstream, but it will include features that the 32bit counterpart doesn't, for example High Deffinition video playback.
64bit computing might not be a huge leap forward, but if you don't have it, you are left in the dark. It's either there or it isn't. Compatible or incompatible. Santa Rosa will indeed be awesome, but you won't find Windows Vista Santa Rosa edition tho.
Answer:
Re: Dell Core 2 Duo fever - but why ?
Vista is at heart a 64-bit OS. Like Microsoft is really going to say no to all those 32 bit customers out there.
Vista will just run fine on 32 bit.
Not worth the extra $500. $500 is the difference I'd have to pay now to get a 9400 (e1705) with the same options as the "deal" I'm dealing with.
Answer:
Re: Dell Core 2 Duo fever - but why ?
Full Windows Vista support. People are futureproofing themselves. Plain and simple, if you want the full Windows Vista experience you need to have 64bit processing. And what features exactly will not work on a 32 bit cpu?
Answer:
Re: Dell Core 2 Duo fever - but why ?
And what features exactly will not work on a 32 bit cpu? Right now, before the OS has even launched it's been announced that High Deffinition video playback will not be supported on 32bit systems. That means all the media technology behind HD-DVD and BluRay, and even HDTV recordings .. which admitidly means little for the laptop user. However, if its a few months out and we're ALREADY hearing about a feature that will be 64-bit only, you can bet Microsoft will start letting it slip that there are more of these gems.
See, Microsoft benifits from making Vista 64-bit only feature sets. They keep the majority of their back-customers satisfied by being able to run the new OS, but provide an insentive to go buy new hardware. New hardware which will make Vista run better, and hence, make it seem like it's Microsoft's Vista causing the performance increases. To the average computer user, they view "Windows" as their computer. They don't see the two as seperate entities. When there is hardware that makes their computer run great, they see that as "ooo this new windows is fast!".
So right now the simple answer to your question is HiDef video playback, but expect more.
Answer:
Re: Dell Core 2 Duo fever - but why ?
"ooo this new windows is fast!". You give an interesting point of view. I have the same cinicism.
At any rate, I'm a Linux guy. I really don't like Microsoft, the company, or Windows. I program in java on that on Linux. I'm not sure if I'm even going to boot XP once when my system arrives.
I really enjoy Linux, it gives me so much power. You should see the kind of network stuff you can do through it - there is just simply no way in hell you could possibly do that sort of stuff in Windows. I'm an advanced user, I like control, so Linux works incredibly well for me.
To play video, I normally use mplayer - which has all the mpeg stuff. To play the wmv format, what they do, is they rip the windows dll, wrap an api emulation layer around it, and run it that way. The European court is about to *force* Microsoft to finally relinquish their stupid video algorithms, so the Linux gurus will soon be able embed that code, rather than having to 'borrow' those dll's.
Anyway. I think that a year from now, I'll simply buy a Merom, and change the chip in my 9400/e1705, upgrade the bios, and get 64 bit that way.
To get 64 bit now will cost me $500 CDN, which is just too much.
The performance improvement is only 10 to 15 ish percent.
I'm a coder, so most of the time, the cpu is waiting for me to press the next key. I'm doing a combination of Java and Machine Language, which will have to remain 32 bit for the time being.
Answer:
Re: Dell Core 2 Duo fever - but why ?
Keep in mind that the performance improvement with a Merom comes from running the processor --at 100%--. There will be no difference doing anything else. Most people will never use the full power of one of their CPU cores anyway, let alone both.
The Core 2 Duo improves over the Core Duo in rendering/encoding, and floating point calculations by the above stated 10-20%. Gaming performance is virtually the same (most laptops are GPU-limited anyway, so it doesn't matter even if the C2D was faster there), and general productivity is very similar. You should not expect to see a performance difference by getting a Core 2 Duo over a regular Core Duo, it is simply not worth a signifigant amount of extra money if you have to shell it out - not to deter anyone from getting a Core 2 - if you want one, go for it.
If anyone is interested, we can get a little further with all this, round up some other numbers and evaluate this thing a little more accurate... Anyone? If you have any benchmarks you'd like, let me know. I am going to move this thread to the hardware section because it will be more useful there.