I am considering buying a "bare bones" system in a few months time.
Could somebody please explain whether I should go for a "Duo" or "D" processor? What is the difference between the two?
Many thanks.
basically a duo has two cores on the one processor. This has been revised and is now the "core 2 duo" and is currently the best processor family you can buy. The pentium D (single core) is old technology,runs much hotter and is generally slower. However, because of it being older technology they are a bit cheaper than the core 2 duos.
I'm building a new system next month and will be using the E6600 core 2 duo processor.
Lance
Many thanks for that Lance.
Lance, sorry to be disagreeable on my first post but pentium D's are not single core however Celeron D's are.
They're dual core chips that use the old pentium 4 core architecture, they are less efficient though and so use more power which means they run hotter like you say.
They are definitely cheaper though which is why I've got one in my PC. Also means I can keep my room warm on these cold winter nights without the need of a radiator! ;)
Chris
RJM,
additionally if you are buying a bare bones system and do decide to go for a Pentium D make sure that your motherboard will support core duo processors.
Both processors share the same socket type skt775 but not all skt775 motherboards will support core duo processors(in fact not all skt 775 boards will support Pentium D's either!). Again there is a price hit though, core duo motherboards cost more than those only supporting P4 and Pentium D processors.
It really depends on the likelihood that you will want to upgrade the processor at some point in the future or if you buy complete systems each time you upgrade.
Chris
Looks, like I should spend that bit extra and go for a "duo".
Thanks for insight Chris.
Quote from: gortonc on Jan 19, 2007, 12:44:33
Lance, sorry to be disagreeable on my first post but pentium D's are not single core however Celeron D's are.
I stand corrected ;D
I guess i should really check these things before consulting my memory!
Quote from: gortonc on Jan 19, 2007, 12:44:33
Lance, sorry to be disagreeable on my first post but pentium D's are not single core however Celeron D's are.
It's only disagreeable if you flame him, Chris. Otherwise,
I would have had to correct Lance when I got here, as I'm typing this on a 'D' and I definitely have two cores (but apparently no keyboard ;) ).
Quote from: rikbean on Jan 19, 2007, 16:29:05
:out:(but apparently no keyboard ;) ).
You're not using crayons and cardboard again? ;D
Naturally. With the way 1&1s email has been this week, it's essential! ;)
I built myself a pc based on the Core2 duo 6300 (1.86GHz) chip back in August. First thing that you notice is that, as it runs so cool, the fan doesn't spin very fast at all so your system runs quieter than most. I also have a pentium4 3GHz PC radiator, which was great in winter as Chris said but can be a pain to keep reasonably cool in the summer.
Rob
Nobody use AMD then? :out:
ATM, intel is the top dawg for performance. I built my pc in october last year and still Core 2 Duo processors are considered the best, but AMD will have somethign up their sleeve no doubt. Core 2 duo processors are fast at stock but are EXTREMELY overclockable. Ive got my e6300 (the cheapest) to 2.6 ghz from 1.8ghz per core extremely easily.
Quote from: Nerval on Jan 19, 2007, 19:41:54
Nobody use AMD then? :out:
Just sold a DTR laptop with a AMD FX60 in it. IMO way better than any Intel. I was sorry to see it go but I needed something smaller and lighter. So yes I ended up with a Intel but no match for the AMD in raw power.
Im considering a core 2 for my new PC - as im currently without a PC :(
Only problem is, ive always had AMD cpu's, a AMD "fan-boy" if you like - who's having problems in coming over to the dark side ;)
But the core 2 duo, is the most powerfull (it took me some effort to admit that!)
Well I've got an AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core processor 4200+ which seems to do the job well enough. It wasn't over expensive either.
There again, for what I do, I suppose the processor from my fridge/freezer would do it too. :laugh:
;)
Im considering a X2 5000+ over a core 2, its not "as fast" as a E6600...but atleast its AMD and not an intel!
Well done avenger. I'd use a moped before getting Intel. :laugh:
The theoretical speeds don't mean squat anyway, there's so many other variables to take into account.
Well I have an Intel Pentium D Computer, I ordered a cheapo Acer with a Sempron in it for my Daughter, I cannot see any difference to be honest.
There isnt really...its just either AMD or Intel. Plus that AMD sempron will use ALOT less power than your Pentium D
the core 2 duos also use a lot less power than pentium Ds!
Quote from: lance on Jan 22, 2007, 12:30:15
the core 2 duos also use a lot less power than pentium Ds!
X2's and core 2 duo's are around the same power wise - suprisingly intel has lost its raidiator ways :)
I've just thrown in a 3800 x2 AMD into my system, it is now running with a 25% overclock, 2.55Ghz rather than the stock 2Ghz, I'm happy for a £66 upgrade :D
Core 2 duos run a lot cooler ;)
Also forcing AMD to drop the X2 prices even further...how could you sell something for the same price as something substantially better? You cant making them lose a lot of the market these last couple of months. AMD need to make something beasty again pretty quick or they'll be relying on the cpu/gpu combination (amd/at merger) a lot sooner than expected!
My overclocked 3800 is around 26c at idle and 42c when maxed out, so it runs quite cool, I'm only using an Arctic Freezer 64 heatsink/fan
Nerval's got the best idea for keeping it cool, he keeps 'is 'puter in the freezer!! :laugh:
Quote from: Nerval on Jan 22, 2007, 10:14:32
...................... There again, for what I do, I suppose the processor from my fridge/freezer would do it too. :laugh:
Or I could keep me fish fingers in the puter :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Quote from: mrapoc on Jan 22, 2007, 16:24:14
Core 2 duos run a lot cooler ;)
Also forcing AMD to drop the X2 prices even further...how could you sell something for the same price as something substantially better? You cant making them lose a lot of the market these last couple of months. AMD need to make something beasty again pretty quick or they'll be relying on the cpu/gpu combination (amd/at merger) a lot sooner than expected!
The price tag of a AMD is very tempting though, its not as if there badly behind - as with most of these things, the intel lead is only slight. Something you'd hardly notice / never notice!
From the reviews i've read the core 2 is miles better than any current AMD offering. So much so that in pc pro, one of the group tests they have done this month only one system submitted had a AMD processor (and from the top of my head this was a £1249 pc before vat) and even the £699 computers (again, before vat), with only the cheap core 2s, beat it performance wise.
It depends what you do as to whether or not you will really notice the difference. If you are into video editing (high processor usage) then you will certainly see the difference. However, if you are just a casual internet and office user you probably wouldn't notice the difference very much at all.
Lol my mate has a e6600 at 4.4ghz per core...tell me that isnt sexual ;D
BTW sexual is the "new" "hip" word to describe something really cool :laugh:
Well the differences, are very very small. Sure the core 2 duo will be faster, but not by much - not really enough to justify paying the extra anyway!
Quote from: mrapoc on Jan 22, 2007, 22:01:23
BTW sexual is the "new" "hip" word to describe something really cool :laugh:
Not another " really cool " word that has no relationship to it's true meaning, I get so confused with " Sexy " cars etc.
I mean, has anyone witnessed a Mondeo having it off with Bentley?.. ??? :banana2:
Quote from: mrapoc on Jan 22, 2007, 22:01:23
............ BTW sexual is the "new" "hip" word to describe something really cool :laugh:
I know my memory isn't what it was ::) ................ but I don't remember ever being 'cool' :laugh:, hot and sticky more like!! :banana2: :banana2:
Quote from: AvengerUK on Jan 22, 2007, 22:47:40
Well the differences, are very very small. Sure the core 2 duo will be faster, but not by much - not really enough to justify paying the extra anyway!
Like I said, it depends on what you do as to whether or not its worth paying the extra. If you are user regularly performing processor intensive tasks such as video encoding or manipulating massive amounts of data in excel then you will certainly notice the difference.
This graph (http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/13/0,1425,sz=1&i=139017,00.gif) Shows that the Intel E6600 (mid range core 2 duo) performs around the same as the best AMD processor (at the time of the review). The difference being that today the AMD FX-62 costs £514 on ebuyer and the E6600 today costs £200.
Obviously, different reviews use different tests and these different tests may stress one aspect of the processor more than another but ultimately they are all coming out with the same outcomes - the core 2 duo is significantly faster! I know which i would buy!
Lance
ps Before anyone calls me a 'intel fanboy' i'll point out my machine at home for the past three and a half years has a AMD athlon xp1800 processor at heart!
Lance, you're an intel fanboy :laugh: :laugh:
damn, I forgot to read your PS
Well, benchmarks often show differences out of proportion. I know, that if i was going to encode something, or play a game, or anything that the CPU effects greatly, id have to look hard to see a difference.
Quote from: Nerval on Jan 23, 2007, 09:07:53
Lance, you're an intel fanboy :laugh: :laugh:
damn, I forgot to read your PS
;D
Quote from: AvengerUK on Jan 23, 2007, 09:09:31
Well, benchmarks often show differences out of proportion. I know, that if i was going to encode something, or play a game, or anything that the CPU effects greatly, id have to look hard to see a difference.
Although looking only at individual benchmarks may give a incorrect picture, there is a common theme coming from them which is that the core 2 duos are significantly faster when it comes to the processor intensive tasks!!!
I wonder which of Intel and AMD takes the reviewers and benchmarkers on better holidays?
Oh no, that was cynical; my life just got shorter :laugh:
Well, significantly better in benchmarks, not so significant in real life use...
**anyone else think im fighting a loosing battle, along with digging, well, i was going to say hole...i think its actually called a pit!**
Quote from: AvengerUK on Jan 23, 2007, 11:47:31
**anyone else think im fighting a losing battle?
Well I can't remember which side you were on. AMD are better though :laugh:
Quote from: AvengerUK on Jan 23, 2007, 11:47:31
Well, significantly better in benchmarks, not so significant in real life use...
It depends what you do in real life!!!!!!!!!! If you do something for your job which is processor intensive then you will notice the difference.
However, as you say, you wouldn't notice the difference in real life if all you did was browse the internet and write a few word documents.
So there, I think we have come to a nice compromise! ;D
Ok, let me put it this way.
Gaming - Intel Core 2's are cirtainally the "BEST" - but would you notice a 5fps difference between a core 2 and a amd x2? Nope :)
in three years time you might :laugh:
But i agree, right now you wouldn't.
Glad that's settled. :banana2:
Quote from: AvengerUK on Jan 23, 2007, 12:36:39
Ok, let me put it this way.
Gaming - Intel Core 2's are cirtainally the "BEST" - but would you notice a 5fps difference between a core 2 and a amd x2? Nope :)
That would depend on the current frame rate, in one of the best online games every released, Grand Prix Legends (9 years old and still in regular use by many), the difference is noticeable between the upper limit of 30fps and 25fps. That said all modern CPU's should be able to max GPL with all of it updates installed.
And I thought it was all settled too!!
Isn't 30fps about the limit above which the human eye can't tell the difference - hence TV, movies etc work at that frame rate or something similar.
So it it was really bad at say 20fps, you'd see the diff between that and 25, but between 30 and 35 you wouldn't. Unless you were a cat or an eagle.
Ya Know Nerval I agree with you entirely, movies run at just over 23fps, PAL video at 25fps and NTSC video at just over 29fps, yet it is generally accepted that PAL is a better video format than NTSC.
As far as which processor is better, well this discussion / argument has amused me for quite a number of years. I used to frequent a number of the overclocking boards and each of the two manufacturers have their own dedicated followers who perform various tests and benchmarks ( which highlight their own processors strengths ) to prove that "their" processor brand is the best.
It's an impossible thing state, much like saying one car is better than another. It all comes down to what you want and are happy with.
Quote from: Odos on Jan 23, 2007, 17:35:14
Ya Know Nerval I agree with you entirely, movies run at just over 23fps, PAL video at 25fps and NTSC video at just over 29fps, yet it is generally accepted that PAL is a better video format than NTSC.
It generally thought that 30fps is the acceptable rate for gaming. Is PAL not better because it has afew extra horizontal lines and therefore a little more detail?
Quote from: Odos on Jan 23, 2007, 17:35:14
It's an impossible thing state, much like saying one car is better than another. It all comes down to what you want and are happy with.
That's that settled again!!!!
I prefer 60fps and no less ;)
At this point in time, the core 2 duos have the best performance for their prices - but the only place you will recognise this is during really heavy gaming (oblivion flat out etc.) and other intensive tasks, most of which i do. These babies really shine when you overclock them :P Mate of mine is at 4.4ghz per core on a e6600...now tell me that is not sweet sweet pwnage?
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Still going strong .. this thread will run forever..
My cats insist on 100fps - they say anything less looks jerky. :laugh:
And I have insisted that my HiFi system reproduce 2Hz to 80kHz, even though I can only hear 20 to 18k myself, as it will be of benefit to passing dogs and blue whales.
So anyway, glad that's settled now. :banana2:
I used to be able to hear 10Hz - 23KHz, but sadly, like so many things, that ability has faded with age. :(
Pardon?
It's no good - YOU'LL HAVE TO SPEAK UP! :P
Yes, she's not been the same since. Such a shame... ???
What time did you say? ::)
Thats right, they're yellower than they used to be.
They do look younger don't they?
(We could write Goon scripts in here :) )
They break now if try to do htings the old ones would have managed with no problems.
(I think you're right, although its seems to make sense so far :o )
It's because of the snow, you know...
The cold makes them stick out.
Ah, now we're getting back onto firmer ground! ;)
Ten Past Four
Thanks, you don't have to shout - it's my eyes that are playing up, together with the forum clock! :)
Quote from: rikbean on Jan 24, 2007, 15:29:16
It's no good - YOU'LL HAVE TO SPEAK UP! :P
:laugh: Make your mind up
Pardon?
Quote from: Nerval on Jan 24, 2007, 16:12:44
:laugh: Make your mind up
My
mind went first. :)
I think I beat you to it... :laugh:
Who said that? ;D
*sighs* this thread is way off topic, must be time to start a thread about having more moderators......
:D
LOL. We did one of those very recently. Let's have one on silver surfers as moderators instead. 8)
Benidorm is very pleasant this time of year
Only if you're there..
Quote from: rikbean on Jan 24, 2007, 16:28:27
LOL. We did one of those very recently. Let's have one on silver surfers as moderators instead. 8)
I Nominate Rik and Nerv as Moderators.
Their duties will include intervening in any thread which is getting too serious, or has not been taken off topic.
They will be responsible for ensuring that contencious issues are discussed frequently, and if all else fails, they will be personally responsible for posting inflammatory content in the Rants and Raves board.
Anybody who tries to get a thread back on topic will be ridiculed.
It is expected that the community will support these two wonderful additions to the Moderating team, and will post random phrases about the place to ensure they are kept on their toes.
Twenty to Five
Quote from: sallyandjames on Jan 24, 2007, 16:32:59
I Nominate Rik and Nerv as Moderators.
Their duties will include intervening in any thread which is getting too serious, or has not been taken off topic.
We do that anyway, and while I can't speak for Nerv, who may well be silver, I'm more pink and grey. :)
Black as the Ace of Spades, me. Or is that Sooty?
And I hereby decline your kind offer. Moderate I'm NOT
I think Sooty...
You could be an Extremist Administrator perhaps....
Quote from: sallyandjames on Jan 24, 2007, 16:38:58
You could be an Extremist Administrator perhaps....
Never come across any other type...
You're thinking of the Thought Police again. :P
Max is very moderate on here.
Mind you, on TB, he grows hair on the palms of his hands............ :laugh:
I thought everyone here was pretty moderate - my thoughts are often stronger than I dare reveal in a forum!
Gotta coupla ideas for clearing space in prisons though....
Bring out the gallows!
Mind you, knowing this Govt, they'd then not have enough space for the bodies, and you'd find that the targets being set didn't allow for the cost of rope and candles...
u read "Wasting Police Time" by David Copperfield (not real name)?
He says prison works, cos while they're in there, they ain't committing more crimes.
Bring back the stocks, we can all have a pop at 'em.
Landfill tax keeps going up too, and we can't burn them because we've cut down too many trees so we can farm McMeat.
Quote from: Nerval on Jan 24, 2007, 16:51:19
u read "Wasting Police Time" by David Copperfield (not real name)?
He says prison works, cos while they're in there, they ain't committing more crimes.
I've had a read of that before Xmas, a really enjoyable read! Shows the state of our police service though, they've not managed to work out who he is have they?
Think the name is made up - if not, then even more amazing they haven't located him....
Quote from: Nerval on Jan 24, 2007, 16:51:19
He says prison works, cos while they're in there, they ain't committing more crimes.
He's not wrong...
If they swing from a gallows they ain't comitting any more crimes....
Tie lead to their boots, they won't swing for long..
If we take the any out of S&J's post, it scans as a little poem. Sweet! :angel:
Quote from: sallyandjames on Jan 24, 2007, 16:57:42
If they swing from a gallows they ain't comitting any more crimes....
Ah, you're karma now... 8)
So which are the best processors then?
AMD isn't it? ;D
This thread will never go to bed.. :banana2:
What's bed?
A place to plant rosies... ;)
Not if youre David Blunkett or John Prescott
Then it would read ;
A place to plant Rosy.. ;)
I forgot, Prescott preferred his desk :laugh:
To what? :)
Not to what, FOR what.
Though he couldn't manage it every time, apparently.
The desk or... ;)
Seem to recal Prescott " planted " a member of the public as well..
He's always been into boxing...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6296053.stm