Intel Core 2 Duo processor

The Core Duo was a bit of a disappointment to some and a bit of a surprise to others; while it was only 32-bit, it performed exceptionally well while drawing little electricity, but it never saw widespread use as a desktop processor. In August, Intel followed up with the Core 2 Duo, which addresses the 64-bit concern while increasing performance and the overall capabilities of the architecture. The major improvement, though, is the Core 2 Duo's availability in an FC-LGA 775 desktop processor package, which means that you can finally build or buy a reasonably-priced system based on a modern Intel CPU architecture. But is it a significant improvement? And how does it stack up to the AMD Athlon 64 X2? Read on for an analysis of the Core 2 Duo's performance, power consumption, motherboard and RAM compatibility, and a brief overview of the advantage to 64-bit processing.

Intel finally gets it right

The Core 2 Duo is the product of many years of innovation at Intel, but it is also the redemption for an equal number of years of bad decisions and embarrassing mistakes in engineering, marketing, and planning.

When the socket 370 Pentium 3 Tualitin core had reached the apparent limitations of its architecture, Intel developed two different upgrade paths for it -- the Pentium M for laptop computers, which explored new ways of adding performance without having to increase the CPU's frequency much; and the Pentium 4, which was a totally new design for desktop systems that made many sacrifices to continue Intel's emphasis on raising the frontside bus frequency to achieve better performance. While there were a few abject failures along the way -- the Mobile Pentium 4 and the Mobile Pentium 4 M to be specific -- the Pentium M developed into the premiere laptop CPU because of its reasonable power consumption and excellent performance.

Around the same time, Intel began making wireless network chips and developed the Centrino brand to represent a laptop computer that had both an Intel Pro Wireless (IPW) network chip and a Pentium M processor. Meanwhile, the Pentium 4 stayed competitive with the AMD Athlon XP (which used easily understood performance ratings while Intel stubbornly insisted on the more traditional and well-known frequency ratings) and hugely successful Athlon 64 processors by offering enhanced multimedia extensions in the form of SSE, SSE2, and SSE3, and greater memory bandwidth (due to the higher frontside bus frequency). But the Pentium 4 architecture was pushed too hard and too far; Intel stretched it to its architectural limits and beyond, with each new core design sucking down embarrassing amounts of electricity while requiring increasingly drastic cooling measures.

When it became impossible to increase the CPU's frequency any more, Intel added more cache memory, Hyper-Threading Technology, and more multimedia functions, and switched from megahertz ratings to processor model numbers, which confused many customers who didn't understand the new chip rating methods or numbers. At the same time, fierce competition from AMD's 64-bit desktop processors significantly eroded Intel's market share, and the future began to look dim for the semiconductor company that made desktop computing popular.

The success of the Pentium M in laptop systems, and the increasingly obvious heat dissipation, power consumption, and performance limitations of the Pentium 4 architecture forced Intel to plot a dramatically different course for its desktop processors. That led to the introduction of the Core Duo, the logical next step for the Pentium M architecture. Instead of the unsuccessful Hyper-Threading Technology, the Core Duo had two discrete processing cores and a respectable amount of cache memory, but it was still 32-bit in a world that is rapidly becoming 64-bit, and it wasn't available for desktop systems (outside of Apple). The Core Duo exists only in a socket M package, which is not used in desktop motherboards, but is frequently found in laptop systems and has been the crown jewel in Apple's new Intel-based Macintosh computers.

And now we have the Core 2 Duo, the logical evolution of the Core Duo, available in a desktop FC-LGA 775 package. It takes the outstanding Core Duo laptop processor architecture and the high-end features of the Pentium D and combines them to achieve high performance while keeping heat generation and power consumption (the two being intrinsically linked) at a tolerable level.

After many years, thus ends the reign of the Pentium brand. Personally, I'm glad to see it go -- I think it's much easier to keep track of processor architectures and formfactors when each distinct generation has its own brand identity.

The 64-bit advantage

The performance advantage of 64-bit x86-64 processors is something I have written much about since the introduction of the first Athlon 64 CPU. Here's the condensed version:

The Core 2 Duo, like the Pentium D before it, is based on Intel's Extended Memory 64 Technology (EM64T), also called AMD64 by AMD and known generically as x86-64. Basically it is the old x86 architecture (called "general purpose instructions" and commonly referred to as the IA32 instruction set architecture (ISA)) plus the old x87 floating point instructions (which are deprecated now but still used by some older 16- and 32-bit programs), 64-bit media instructions (ala MMX and 3DNow!) and these significant enhancements:

• Increased number of general purpose registers
• 64-bit addressing
• 128-bit (SSE, SSE2, SSE3) media instructions
• Improved physical and virtual memory management

The EM64T ISA includes twice as many general purpose registers as the old x86 design, and all of them are twice as wide due to 64-bit addressing (as opposed to 32-bit). The instruction pointers (a pointer is a variable that contains an address rather than data) also increase from 32 to 64.

Having more and wider general purpose registers means that memory can be used much more efficiently and memory traffic can be minimized, which in turn allows compilers to compile programs to work much faster on your machine.

64-bit addressing means that the physical memory limitation rises to 1TB (that's 1000GB) from the 32-bit limit of 4GB. The processor can also work with longer instructions. To really notice this advantage, you have to stress the system to a degree that most desktop users don't with current software, but as desktop applications demand more from processing hardware, this advantage will become much more important. The advantages to 64-bit addressing in a workstation or server machine are more obvious as they regularly deal with CPU-intensive work.

128-bit media instructions refer specifically to Intel's SSE, SSE2, and SSE3 (Streaming SIMD -- Single Instruction Multiple-Data -- Extensions) technologies. These instructions are very useful for working with large blocks of data, which benefits anyone who deals with a lot of scientific data or high-performance media (streaming high-resolution video, image processing, 3D rendering, and speech recognition) or anything that uses floating-point math.

EM64T deals with both physical and virtual memory in a much more sensible manner than x86, treating the entire virtual memory space as one unsegmented block and eliminating a lot of translation layers from the process of addressing physical memory. Previously x86 would segment virtual memory into small blocks for use with different programs and functions, but this ended up being inefficient and rarely used by software. EM64T eliminates that inefficiency by letting the software choose how it will handle virtual memory (which it does anyway, even if the virtual memory is segmented). This translates into lower latency and faster performance when dealing with both physical and virtual memory.

Performance and enhanced capabilities aside, the most valuable feature of the EM64T is its ability to run 32-bit x86 binaries without a separate processor or operating system (though 64-bit operating systems will need to have 32-bit compatibility libraries installed in order to use 32-bit programs). This makes it much easier to slowly transition from a 32-bit to a 64-bit environment without having to change software applications. While AMD64 and EM64T processors are still very fast while in 32-bit mode, you won't be able to take advantage of any of the above-mentioned features and expanded resources (with the exception of the SSE/SSE2/SSE3 instructions) if you're running a 32-bit operating system. Even if you're going to be running 32-bit binary programs, it pays to have a 64-bit operating system underneath them so that the rest of the system can run more efficiently.

Performance

The first thing you should know (especially if you skipped the previous section on how 64-bit computing makes a difference) is that the performance difference between running a fully 64-bit operating system and a 32-bit operating system can be anywhere from nothing (if you don't do any real computing) to a 100% increase or more (if you do any video or audio encoding or other things that require a powerful CPU and a lot of RAM). Secondly, if you're serious about 64-bit computing, you're going to have to kiss Windows goodbye -- it has the industry's lousiest EM64T/AMD64 support. I highly recommend Mandriva Linux PowerPack Edition for desktop use and OpenBSD for servers.

So let's take a look at how the new Core 2 Duo performs. I hate synthetic benchmark tests and unless there's a very good reason to use them, I will always publish real-world benchmarks instead. Below you'll see two programs in use: oggenc, which encodes WAV audio files into the OGG/Vorbis format (you can expect similar results for MP3 encoding/decoding), and OpenSSL, which you use every time your computer needs to encrypt data (such as through a secure Web form). The OpenSSL speed tests are limited to AES, which is the one of the best indicators of 64-bit performance among all of the OpenSSL ciphers. The Athlon 64 X2 and Core 2 Duo tests were run from the 64-bit edition of Mandriva Linux 2007, and the Pentium D and Pentium 4 tests were run in 32-bit Gentoo. The Pentium D also had twice as much RAM as the other test machines. Many would say that this is an unfair comparison; I agree to a certain extent, but the Pentium D is a production machine that I could disconnect for a few minutes to run these tests, so that's the way it has to be. The 820 and the P4 3.2E are also low-end in their respective classes, so we're not really comparing the best-of-breed here. What we are doing is showing how much faster the Core 2 Duo is than three systems that you might reasonably have on your desk right now.

The OpenSSL numbers are in thousands of bytes per second processed, so higher numbers mean greater performance. The oggenc test results were measured with the standard Unix/BSD/GNU time command, and the test data was The Doors' LA Woman album, ripped with cdparanoia -Bw with default settings from the command line. Lower times mean higher performance.

OpenSSL running on an Athlon 64 X2 3800+ processor in an Asus A8N-E motherboard with a Corsair TwinX LL DDR-400 1024MB set (two tested 512MB modules):

Cipher	16 bytes	64 bytes	256 bytes	1024 bytes	8192 bytes
aes-128 cbc	83711.88k	86110.78k	87626.25k	88013.83k	88133.09k
aes-192 cbc	75244.86k	76571.56k	77698.76k	77985.74k	78074.84k
aes-256 cbc	67943.89k	68785.95k	69749.08k	69994.72k	70070.49k

OpenSSL running on an Intel Pentium 4 3.2E in an Intel D875PBZLK motherboard with Corsair TwinX-LL DDR-400 1024MB kit (two tested 512MB modules):

Cipher	16 bytes	64 bytes	256 bytes	1024 bytes	8192 bytes
aes-128 cbc	79154.59k	78949.15k	81544.36k	81947.53k	82485.71k
aes-192 cbc	70636.01k	70085.72k	71894.33k	72926.05k	73213.11k
aes-256 cbc	62936.16k	63083.62k	64930.03k	65524.64k	65603.78k

OpenSSL running on an Intel Pentium D 820 in an Asus P5WD2 motherboard with four Crucial DDR2-533 512MB modules:

Cipher	16 bytes	64 bytes	256 bytes	1024 bytes	8192 bytes
aes-128 cbc	75613.37k	104218.54k	116415.31k	119441.27k	122052.61k
aes-192 cbc	67167.84k	89894.06k	100509.44k	103326.02k	103768.06k
aes-256 cbc	61230.37k	79156.29k	87579.98k	88962.73k	90608.98k

OpenSSL running on an Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 in an Asus P5B motherboard with two 512MB GEiL PC2-5300 RAM modules:

Cipher	16 bytes	64 bytes	256 bytes	1024 bytes	8192 bytes
aes-128 cbc	131805.21k	140084.86k	141458.46k	142305.62k	140692.14k
aes-192 cbc	115836.18k	122063.18k	123798.27k	124110.85k	122719.43k
aes-256 cbc	103268.94k	108615.40k	109983.49k	109789.47k	109510.66k

Now for the oggenc tests. All time is listed in seconds and each number represents the real time (the total elapsed time), user time (the time it takes to execute the utility), and system overhead time:

Oggenc Real Time

Athlon 64 X2 3800+ Pentium 4 3.2E Pentium D 820 Core 2 Duo E6700 149.91 249.64 256.58 97.33

The User and System times are not as important as the Real time listed above; the Real time is the total time elapsed for the test, and it's really the only time that matters to you as an end user. A high System time can mean inefficiencies in the hardware design or a lack of optimization in the operating system.

Oggenc User Time

Athlon64 X2 3800+ Pentium 4 3.2E Pentium D 820 Core 2 Duo E6700 148.31 247.87 253.40 96.65

Oggenc System Time

Athlon64 X2 3800+ Pentium 4 3.2E Pentium D 820 Core 2 Duo E6700 1.22 1.05 1.17 0.49

So the Core 2 Duo E6700 on a 64-bit operating system is roughly twice as fast as the Pentium 4 3.2E and the Pentium D 820 on 32-bit operating systems, and about 50% faster than the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ on a 64-bit OS -- that's incredible. Intel has not had a CPU this much faster than the previous generation since the introduction of the original Pentium processor. It doesn't quite bury the Athlon 64 X2 as badly, but it's still significantly faster. Also, I'll mention once again that the three CPU's being compared to the E6700 are the slowest in their class, but they are processors that you could reasonably expect to find in many of today's home computers -- even new ones.

Power consumption

Below are power usage tests that compare the Pentium D 820, AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+, and the Core 2 Duo E6700 (the Pentium 4 system is long gone, and at the time that I had it, I didn't do power consumption tests). Both the Pentium D and the Athlon 64 X2 systems used an Asus P5WD2 or A8N-E motherboard; an Antec TrueBlue 480 power supply; 1GB of either DDR2-533 or DDR400 RAM in two modules; one Seagate SATA-V hard drive; a Matrox G550 1X PCIe video card; and a Lite-On 52X CDRW/DVD-ROM drive. The Core 2 Duo used an Asus P5B motherboard with 1GB of GEiL DDR2-800 RAM in two modules, with all other components being the same.

Electricity consumption is generally measured in kilowatt hours (KWh), though my test period was only 15 minutes, so the actual power usage is measured in watt hours, while the projected monthly usage (assuming 24x7 operation with frequent periods of inactivity) is in kilowatt hours. I measured electricity usage via the Watts Up Pro, a watt meter designed specifically for measuring power consumption of consumer devices. I calculated the costs based on the average for the state of Florida in the year 2002: $0.0731 (a little more than seven cents per KWh). That price has gone up dramatically since then, but the point is to show approximate differences, not precise estimates.

CPU (with the rest of the system)	Watt hours	Average monthly KWh	Average monthly cost	Min/Max watts measured
AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+	28.4	81	$5.91	95/168
Intel Pentium D 820	42.6	123	$8.97	156/264
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700	40.6	117.0	$8.55	133.4/196.6

Again -- the Pentium D and Athlon 64 X2 are the slowest, lowest-power CPUs in their classes, and the high-end models can draw as much as three times more electricity. The E6700 is the top CPU in its class as of this writing, and it still draws less power than its desktop predecessor while doubling performance. This is, to my knowledge, the first time Intel has ever successfully accomplished this feat with a desktop CPU.

Secondly, for being 50% less powerful, the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is drawing a lot more than half the electricity of the Core 2 Duo. That makes the Core 2 Duo the most efficient high-end desktop processor I've ever tested.

Motherboard and chipset compatibility

There are now several motherboards that can accommodate either a Pentium D or a Core 2 Duo processor. Some require a BIOS upgrade, though, and to do that you need a CPU that the motherboard can work with. In other words, you'd need a Pentium D processor to boot with, then you'd have to upgrade the BIOS, then you could install a Core 2 Duo. This option is only viable for people who own these motherboards and wish to upgrade from a Pentium D to a Core 2 Duo. Check your motherboard documentation and the manufacturer's Web site carefully before you buy anything. In some cases, a newer revision of the BIOS is already installed on the board. If you buy from a local computer parts store, you can check the motherboard revision number in person before you buy it, or possibly have store technicians update the BIOS for you before you take the board home. It's a bad idea to buy a board from an online retailer if you need a specific revision -- you're likely to get the wrong one, and online retailers are unlikely to be sympathetic to your situation.

RAM support varies, but as of this writing it's all DDR2 across the board. Some chipsets can do DDR2-533 and some can do DDR2-667 or DDR2-800. The actual frontside bus (the physical pathway between the RAM and the CPU on Intel systems) operates at a frequency of 1066Mhz, so that should be the theoretical limit of the RAM frequency as well.

As far as operating system support is concerned, you definitely want a 64-bit OS for maximum performance. Forget Windows XP -- if you need to stay with Windows, it'll have to be Windows Vista. Otherwise, give GNU/Linux a shot. If maximum performance doesn't matter to you, you're probably reading the wrong article.

All modern operating systems will easily support dual-core processors, and all the ones worth using will also be 64-bit.

Intel's Core 2 Duo Processor Worth the Hype?

In the months leading up to the release of Core 2 Duo processor - also referred to as "Conroe" for desktops - many questions remained unanswered. Did Intel make the necessary changes to compete with AMD's processor advantage?

The Core 2 Duo is the successor of NetBurst micro-architecture that has powered most Intel processors since 2000. The Pentium brand name - created in 1993 - no longer exists with the release of Core 2. Also, this is the first reunion of Intel's notebook and desktop product lines since Pentium M was released apart from Pentium 4 in 2003.

Core 2 Duo technology allows for a faster chip - up to 40 percent faster with 40 percent less power consumption - than the Pentium EE because of new techniques such as Smart Cache and Wide Dynamic Execution (WDE).

Dynamic cache allocation within Intel's Smart Cache technology efficiently apportions the cache memory according to what is needed by each execution core. This results in an optimized performance because the Intel Core Duo processor enables increased cache utilization.

According to Intel, WDE enables delivery of more instructions per clock cycle to improve execution time and energy efficiency. Every execution core is 33% wider than previous generations, allowing each core to fetch, dispatch, execute and retire up to four full instructions simultaneously.

The current extreme version - the X6800 - features an unlocked multiplier, which means the clock multiplier can be adjusted higher or lower than 11.0x (derived from the 11:1 ratio of the maximum Intel tested bus-to-core process). That technology for a retail Intel chip is treading new ground. The X6800 has shown the ability to be over-clocked to 3.4 GHz on regular heat-sink/fan air cooling. The over-clocking is a first for Intel and a big win for hands on users like high end gamers.

Benchmarking tests in multimedia and gaming have proven that the X6800 can lead the best AMD processor by up to 36% in performance.

The new chips are also smaller and less expensive to produce than Intel's Pentium D900 series, and they are much smaller than the Athlon 64 X2s despite packing more transistors. The smaller die and greater amount of manufacturing facilities creates more pricing flexibility for Intel than AMD.

The Core 2 Duo technology also allows for compatibility to existing systems and creates versatility.

Upgraders and system manufacturers can place the Core 2 Duo chips into some current Pentium D/EE (LGA775) motherboards with some BIOS/Firmware updates.

One physical desktop can be turned into several virtual systems (all running different applications and operating systems). As an example: an individual can play a game while an FTP server is executed and a Web server is operated on another system. Meanwhile, at the same time, a database can be worked on.

Another important feature is the security platform the Core 2 Duo chips provide. Before the release of the Core 2 Duo processors, only business PCs had Trusted Platform Module (TPM) protection built in to the system. Now, with the Core 2 Duo, all PCs have TPM. Within the hardware, all passwords, logons and personal data are protected from hackers, spyware and identity thieves.

The Allendale, a codename for stripped-down versions of the Conroe processors with 2MB of L2 cache, and Merom, with largely the same features as the Conroe with an emphasis on lower power consumption to enhance the life of a notebook battery.

In summary, Intel's release of the Core 2 Duo processor comes as advertised, both fast and energy-efficient. With more enhancements of Core 2 on the way - and AMD preparing to launch its answer to Conroe with a "4x4" chip (systems can use a pair of high-end dual-core chips) - what is considered fast now will be slow in the future.

Intel - Core 2 Duo E6700 review

In June 2003 Intel released the 3.2GHz Northwood Pentium 4 and after that it entered a black period with the Prescott core which failed miserably to produce decent clock speeds despite a move to a 90nm fabrication process.

To add to Intel's woes, Prescott consumed huge amounts of power and therefore shed enormous amounts of heat. In short, Prescott wasn't a good processor so Intel took the bold step of scrapping the NetBurst architecture, including Prescott's 65nm Tejas successor, and instead returned to the drawing board.

This gave AMD two years of grace, in which time its Athlon 64 and Opteron processors have ruled the roost. But now Intel is back and it means business. The new desktop processor that launches this month is Core 2 Duo. This is the second version of Intel's notebook Core processor, while the 'Duo' means it is dual core, so in time we shall doubtless see Core 3 Trio and then Core 4 Quadro, or perhaps that should be Core 4 Quattro.

Core 2 Duo takes Intel's desktop processors in a new direction by putting the emphasis on efficiency rather than clock speed, so the new processors run on a Quad-pumped 266MHz Front Side Bus which is the equivalent of 1,066MHz.

However, the actual clock speeds are relatively low. The E6300 runs at 1.86GHz and costs £153, the E6400 is 2.13GHz and costs £182, the E6600 gives you 2.40GHz for £253 and the top-of-the-line E6700 has a clock speed of 2.67GHz and is on sale at £411.

In truth there's one more member of the family as the X6800 will be released about a month after the E series processors, but as this 2.93GHz Extreme processor will cost about £800 it's safe to say that sales will be low, even if its clock multiplier is unlocked and thus offers the prospect of some serious overclocking.

Intel Core 2 Duo has a much shorter pipeline length than the NetBurst Pentium 4 processors and it also uses the L2 cache as a shared pool, instead of dividing it into two even chunks with half reserved for each core. E6300 and E6400 have 2MB of L2 while the faster processors have 4MB of cache.

We can waffle on all day about the technical features but what counts is how the new processor performs. Recently this reviewer ran a group test of AM2 motherboards and in each case the AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 processor encoded a 350MB DivX movie file to DVD format in about 13 minutes. This test almost ignores the motherboard, chipset, memory and hard drive and puts the emphasis on the processor. The fastest AM2 board managed it in 13 minutes dead while the slowest came in at 13 minutes 22 seconds. In the bad old days before dual core processors, an Athlon 64 3800+ would take about half an hour.

By contrast the Core 2 Duo E6700 took 9 minutes 52 seconds and it is worth noting that the E6700 runs at 2.67GHz while the FX-62 has a clock speed of 2.8GHz, so the Core 2 Duo is much more powerful even at a nominally slower clock speed. And throughout the test the processor heatsink remained cool to the touch.

We also ran PCMark05 and the Core 2 Duo scored very well in every section of the benchmark, so make no mistake about it: Core2 Duo is a fabulous processor. But of course you need more than a bare chip inside your PC and this is where things get a bit confusing.

Intel supports Core 2 Duo with the current i975X chipset which it launched in December 2005 and, as Core 2 Duo uses the same LGA775 socket as the later models of Pentium 4, you might hope that this provides a direct upgrade path.

Think again.

Intel's Press kit includes a new revision of its D975XBX motherboard, however our year-old version of the same board wouldn't boot with Core 2 Duo installed even though we had upgraded the BIOS to the latest version. We understand that the new D975XBX board has significant revisions to the power regulation hardware, so if you want a Core 2 Duo you'll need a new motherboard in which case you may as well opt for the latest 965P chipset which launches alongside Core 2 Duo.

This chipset supports the fastest DDR2 memory and 1,066MHz FSB and is paired with the new ICH8 Southbridge which supports six SATA ports and HD audio. Unfortunately it doesn't support IDE, so most motherboards will have an add-in controller to allow you to connect your optical drive.

The ominous thing is that you can't connect a pair of Nvidia graphics cards in SLI on an Intel chipset motherboard as the graphics drivers require a suitable Nvidia chipset, so for the moment you are limited to a single graphics card or a pair of ATi cards in CrossFire. Gamers will, therefore, probably want to avoid the Intel chipsets.

Happily, Nvidia is a launch partner with the new Intel processor and it will unveil versions of the Nforce 500 chipsets that we saw with the AMD AM2 platform, and very good they are too. We'll reserve judgement until we've seen the new silicon but the Intel versions of Nforce4 ran incredibly hot which was probably related to the additional memory controller that Nvidia had to integrate in the Northbridge. AMD, of course, includes the memory controller in the CPU core while an Intel processor leaves the job to the chipset.

Nforce 500 is superb on the AMD platform and provided Nvidia's done the job correctly we expect that gamers will migrate to the Nforce 590 SLI in their droves. Still, gamers are only part of the market, so what about the rest of us?

We tested our E6700 on an Asus P5B Deluxe with P965 and ICH8R chipset, 2GB of Corsair XMS 8500 memory and a WD Raptor 150GB hard drive. The motherboard employs passive cooling throughout and during our performance testing we ran a noisy Sapphire X1900 XTX graphics card to generate some impressive results.

Once we were done we swapped the Sapphire for a passively cooled Asus EN7600GS graphics card and plugged in a fan controller on the CPU heatsink. We turned the controller down to barely audible levels and measured the heatsink temperature at 35 degrees while the graphics card touched 51 degrees during testing. Performance was adequate for all but the most demanding gaming and the noise level of the PC was very close to silent.

Apple Unveils New iMacs With Intel Core 2 Duo Chips

Taking another step to grab market share from the PC space, Apple moved its entire iMac all-in-one desktop family to Intel Core 2 Duo processors and dropped its starting price for the product line below $1,000.

Apple on Wednesday rolled out a $999 iMac with a 17-inch screen, a 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo processor, 512 Mbytes of 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (expandable to 2 Gbytes) and a 160-Gbyte hard drive. Previous 17-inch iMacs had a starting street price of $1,299.

The Cupertino, Calif.-based company also unveiled a brand-new, 24-inch widescreen iMac. Priced at $1,999, the system sports a 2.16GHz Core 2 Duo processor with 4 Mbytes of shared L2 cache, 1 Gbyte of 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (expandable to 3 Gbytes) and a 250-Gbyte hard drive.

Rounding out the upgraded iMac line are a 20-inch model with a 2.16GHz Core 2 Duo processor ($1,499) and a 17-inch model with a 2GHz Core 2 Duo processor ($1,199).

Apple VARs said the Intel-based Macintosh computers have been selling briskly all year.

George Swords, marketing manager for PowerMacPac, a Portland, Ore.-based Apple specialist, said the iMacs had previously been selling "ridiculously hot. Really, really selling well." About 60 percent of the early adopters of the Intel-based iMacs were previous Mac users who were upgrading, and "the rest are ex-PC people," he added.

Apple's switch to Intel and more competitive pricing are spurring sales against rivals such as Dell, according to Swords. "Moving to Intel was a wonderful thing to do," he said. "The [Mac OS X] operating system runs better on Intel than it ever ran on PowerPC."

It's Core 2 Duo Time For Intel

At an event at the company's headquarters today, it will formally unveil its Core 2 Duo family for desktop and mobile systems.

Intel started talking about its next-generation processor, codenamed Conroe, in April when it launched its vPro business brand.

The desktop chip has already been generating revenue for Intel based on pre-orders.

And numerous computer companies are expected to launch Core 2 Duo desktop computers at the event today.

Intel and some of its partners will also use the setting to preview "Merom," the mobile chip member of the Core 2 Duo family. But mobile systems based on that processor aren't expected out for another full month.

The basic details of Conroe and Intel's new architecture have been widely reported for months.

"It will be a challenge for Intel to say something interesting and new at the event," Nathan Brookwood, an analyst with Insight64, told internetnews.com.

LATEST NEWS

Google Cofounder Surprises Web 2.0 Summit
Windows 7 Launch: Microsoft's Big Bet on a New OS
Seagate, SanDisk See SSD Sales Soaring Soon
Amazon Sees Big Jump in Sales, Net Income
Intel CEO Predicts 'A Very Strong Second Half'

The news will actually be whatever the vendors on hand have to say about the Core 2 Duo systems they plan to ship.

In a pre-briefing that confirms aggressive pricing by Intel , HP said its new Core 2 Duo, xw4400 mini tower workstation would start at $829, about the same as the slower, more power-hungry xw4300 model it replaces.

"Conroe is a totally new architecture that includes the best features of Intel's mobile and desktop architecture," said HP product marketing manager, Sean Tucker. "The performance is phenomenal and we're seeing a significant reduction in power from the 135 watts on the Pentium D down to 65 watts for these new systems."

Reviewers and analysts have given Conroe top marks in early benchmark and product evaluation testing.

The chip is far speedier than the current Pentium line, yet uses less energy. It also outperforms competitor AMD.

But during its earnings call last week, AMD president Dirk Meyer didn't seem bothered that Intel may have the speediest desktop chip for now.

"The performance crown gets passed back and forth, and I expect that to continue," said Meyer.

He noted AMD has a super-charged version of its Athlon64 FX chip in the works aimed at the enthusiast and high-end gamer market.

Codenamed 4x4, the processor is a four-core, multi-socket platform with 2 megabytes of memory per core.

"We think our 4 x 4 will appeal to the hearts, minds and wallets of our enthusiast customers," Meyer said.

Meanwhile Dell, which plans to roll out its first systems based on AMD processors later this year, said it will be ready to ship several different Conroe-based systems.

"What we see with Core 2 Duo is extremely exciting, because it's the first time in many years we see a major performance breakthrough with a new chip," Joe Curley, director of product marketing for Dell's XP and Dimension desktops, told internetnews.com.

Dell will offer a new Dimension 9200 system starting at $1,499, an XPS 410 system starting at $1,390 and Precision 390 workstation starting at $1,050.

These systems are all based on Core 2 Duo and designed for the home, high end home/professional and engineer/enthusiast markets respectively.

Intel CEO Paul Otellini said last week that with the introduction of Conroe at the top end, Intel would be able to offer computer makers a three-tier, Good, Better, Best pricing on its family of chips.

"Core 2 Duo is the best microprocessor in the world, and we're going to ramp up as soon as possible," said Otellini. "Then we can lower Pentium to system price points not previously seen."

Dell's Curley confirmed lower prices noting Dell has already begun pricing Entry-level, Pentium-based desktop computers at below $300.

Intel Core 2 Duo Processor

Some things just belong together

Revolutionize your PC with the Intel® Core™2 Duo processor and Microsoft Windows Vista*. Get blistering performance, stunning entertainment, and the power to do more than ever before. Because when superior design meets groundbreaking technology, the possibilities are endless.

Get more out of your PC

• Get up to 40% more performance¹ with Intel Core 2 Duo desktop processors powering Vista. Do more at once with effortless multi-tasking.
• Let Intel® Graphics Technology give you the most out of the new Windows Aero* user experience.
• Find documents and data files in a flash with the speed of the Intel Core 2 Duo processor and the dynamic search capabilities of Windows Vista.
• Bring your imagination to life with Intel Core 2 Duo desktop processors powering Windows Photo Gallery* and Windows Movie Maker*.

Create a high-definition slideshow movie with 100 of your favorite photos in about an hour; 57% faster than previous generation processors.²

Convert 30 minutes of MPEG video files into a high-definition Windows Media* file in under an hour; 29% faster than previous generation processors. ³

Experience breathtaking high-definition entertainment

Now everyone in your family can find, organize, create and play all their digital entertainment in one place with Intel® Viiv™ processor technology powered by the Intel Core 2 Duo processor.

• Rock the house with smooth, high-definition video playback and up to 7.1 theater-quality surround sound with Intel's support for the Dolby PC Entertainment experience on Windows Vista.
• Blast new and exclusive music, TV shows, and movies from your entertainment PC.

Get your game on

• More play, your way with the Intel® Core™2 Extreme processor for unbelievable game-play realism.
• Satisfy your passion for extreme gaming: enjoy jaw-dropping, next-generation 3D graphics and a wide selection of high-performance games.
• Handle advanced AI and physics for intense, stutter-free 3D gaming.

Your digital life to go+

Play and share your favorite movies, games, music, and home videos on your Intel® Centrino® Duo processor technology-based laptop featuring the Intel Core 2 Duo processor, and Windows Vista.

• Enjoy the highest level of the Windows Aero user experience with Intel Graphics.
• Do more of the things you love where and when you want: laptops running Vista on Intel Centrino Duo processor technology deliver outstanding power management for great battery life, and easy-to-use options for enhanced security when connecting wirelessly on the go.
• Tailor your wireless environment on the go using Windows Mobility Center and an Intel Centrino Duo processor technology based-laptop. Confidently connect to wireless networks at a growing number of hotspots around the world.
• Enjoy more time unplugged thanks to outstanding processor performance, energy efficiency, and power-management features that maximize battery life.

Intel Core 2 Duo T9300

For a year now Intel has been flaunting its 45nm "Penryn" processor core with its SSE4 instruction set, High-K metal gate transistors, and 6MB of L2 cache. Most of the Penryn media attention has been focused upon the desktop Core 2 processors, but in January at the 2008 Consumer Electronic Show Intel had rolled out sixteen new products and a dozen of them were mobile oriented. Among these Intel innovations were the first mobile Penryn processors. These mobile Intel 45nm CPUs accompanied the Penryn desktop line-up that first began in November of 2007 with Core 2 Extreme QX9650 and then continued with several new Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Duo models. On the server front, the Penryn equivalent is Harpertown and those quad-core Xeon processors have been shipping for the same length of time. Today we are focusing upon the Intel Penryn performance on the mobile front as we explore the Core 2 Duo T9300. The Core 2 Duo T9300 is running inside a Lenovo ThinkPad T61 notebook and we have compared its performance against earlier Centrino-based ThinkPads as we look at how this latest Intel processor performs with Ubuntu Linux.

Intel's Core 2 Duo T9300 is a dual-core part clocked at 2.50GHz, has 6MB of Level 2 cache, hafnium-infused circuitry, and 800MHz front side bus. The Penryn parts also support other Intel innovations such as Wide Dynamic Execution, Deep Power Down Technology, Smart Memory Access, Turbo Memory, Digital Media Boost, Rapid Memory Power management, and Dynamic Power Coordination. Unlike the desktop Penryn processors with the Intel Bearlake motherboards that operate with a 1333MHz FSB, the mobile Penryn processors with the mobile 965 "Crestline" Chipset are bound to an 800MHz FSB. These mobile processors exclusively use DDR2, but Intel's next-generation mobile processors will utilize DDR3. With the next-generation "Montevina" processors, Intel will also be embedding WiMax capabilities (802.11g/n WiFi support will remain). THe Intel T9300 also possesses Intel Virtual Technology (VT), Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology (EIST), Intel 64, SSE4, and Execute Disable Bit. Last but not least, the Core 2 Duo T9300 has a Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 35 Watts.

Above are a few of the Intel Penryn slides (mostly on the power enhancements) from one of the sessions we were at during the 2007 Fall Intel Developer Forum. The Core 2 Duo Mobile Penryn line-up currently consists of the T8100, T8300, T9300, and T9500. Leading Intel's mobile processor line-up is the Core 2 Extreme X9000, which the flagship T9500 only has a 100MHz frequency boost over the T9300. Differing the T8XXX and T9XXX parts is that the T8100 and T8300 only have 3MB of L2 cache.

These mobile Penryn processors are part of Intel's "Santa Rosa Refresh", with the Intel 965 Express Chipset continuing to live on as part of this H1'08 revision. The Mobile Intel 965 Express Chipset supports an Intel Core 2 Duo processor on a 533/800MHz bus, integrated Intel graphics or a discrete graphics processor via PCI Express x16, DDR2-533/667 memory, and an Intel Active Management Engine. The Intel 82801 Southbridge supports six PCI Express x1 lanes, Intel Turbo Memory, Serial ATA, Intel HD Audio, USB 2.0, Gigabit Ethernet, and Intel 4965AGB WiFi.

Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 Wolfdale CPU

Intel fans have been patiently waiting for the company to release their lineup of refreshed Core 2 Duo and Quad products. Intel started hyping these revised components late last year, and they were expected to hit the market in January of this year. While Intel technically hit that date with the release of one 45nm component, it was the ultra-expensive Core 2 Extreme QX9650, which sells for over $1,000. Not really the type of component that everyone can get their hands on. Nevertheless, the current generation of 65nm Core 2 products continued to fall in price, and with no real competition from AMD’s Phenom X4 lineup, there really hasn’t been too much of a problem with Intel’s delays.

In the meantime, Intel has been producing 45nm components and building up inventory, and the first wave of them is getting ready to finally hit the market. Intel’s 45nm technology will allow for this new lineup of Core 2 processors to have significantly smaller dies, allowing Intel to put more cache onto the processor die, which in turn helps them to achieve higher performance. The new manufacturing technology also improves power consumption and heat production, and will allow Intel to scale the processors to higher clock speeds, finally allowing us to break through the 3.0 GHz wall which the industry has been stuck at for some time.

Intel’s new 45nm Core 2 processors are members of the “Penryn” family, which has two sub-codenames as well. Intel has “Yorkfield”, their 45nm Core 2 quad-core processor design, along with “Wolfdale”, their 45nm Core 2 dual-core processor design. Today we’ll be looking at the fastest member of Intel’s first wave of “Wolfdale” processors, which will officially be sold under the name “Core 2 Duo E8500”.

While this new lineup of Core 2 processors does not showcase a huge architectural change for Intel’s flagship processor lineup, we do see a host of smaller changes all coming together for a product lineup which is, in reality, one of the most exciting processor releases in some time. “Wolfdale” chips have been receiving much more buzz than expected, and early adopters who have received them have been thrilled with their flexibility, performance, and environmental attributes.

Intel's Core 2 Duo E8500 processor

3.16 GHz Clock Speed, Dual-Core "Wolfdale" Core Architecture 45nm Manufaturing Technology 128 kB L1 Cache (Data/Instruction) 6 MB Shared L2 Cache (Full Speed) 1333 MHz Front Side Bus Speed

Socket-775 Form Factor Design 1.225V Default Core Voltage Supports 32/64-bit Processing (EM64T) Supports SSE / SSE2 / SSE3 / SSE4.1 Supports Intel Speedstep / C1E Supports Execute Disable (xD) Bit

Core 2 Duo E8500 ES

Core 2 Duo E8500 ES

The Core 2 Duo E8500 processor, as we’ve mentioned, is based on Intel’s new 45nm “Wolfdale” design. This new design brings some significant benefits to the table in comparison to the previous generation 65nm “Conroe” design. Let’s run through a few of them.

First off, clock speeds. The previous generation Core 2 Duo lineup clocked up to 3.0 GHz at its peak with the E6850, whereas this new line of Core 2 Duo processors is hitting 3.16 GHz with its first release. The E8500 runs at 3.16 GHz, whereas we will also have the E8400 (3.0 GHz), E8300 (2.83 GHz) and E8200 (2.66 GHz) on the market soon as well. These chips all run at 1333 MHz front side bus speed by default, a feature which was only seen on the later models of the older Core 2 lineup. Keep in mind; Intel likes to nudge up clock speeds over time, so we are fully expecting that these new Wolfdale chips will be launched at speeds at ~3.5 GHz in time – especially judging from the overclocking results which we’ll show later.

Secondly, the new “Wolfdale” design improves power consumption. Intel’s previous lineup had TDP (Thermal Design Power) levels of 75W when hitting clock speeds of 2.6 – 2.9 GHz, whereas the new Core 2 Duo E8500 processor has a TDP level of 65W when running at 3.16 GHz. Lower TDP levels mean it’s consuming less power from your outlet and producing less heat, which means power supplies and cooling systems don’t have to work quite as hard. It also helps overclockability, as well. The Core 2 Duo E8500 “Wolfdale” component runs at a 1.225V core voltage level, compared to 1.325V of the prior generation.

Thirdly, Intel has shrunk the size of the chip considerably. Previous generation dual-core processors were 143 mm2, whereas the new “Wolfdale” Core2 Duo processors are 107mm2 under the hood. This means Intel can make more of these chips per wafer, hopefully helping to drive down costs. So far, it seems to be working, as “Wolfdale” chips are actually selling for LESS compared to previous generation models at lower clock speeds. The smaller size also has let Intel up the amount of L2 cache on the processor die up to 6 MB per chip, compared to 4 MB with previous generation dual-cores. All applications can make benefit of additional cache, especially games, so this is definitely a good thing.

Intel has also thrown in the new SSE 4.1 instruction set with this new lineup as well, which helps with video encoding speeds especially. All of the other standard Core 2 goodies are there as well, like hardware virtualization acceleration, execute disable bit (xD), 64-bit processing support, and SSE-2/3 support. Not to mention, these new 45nm chips still run in the same Socket-775 form factor we’ve come to know and love throughout the past few years. Most newer motherboards which support 1333 MHz FSB will be compatible with this new lineup of Core 2 processors, although a large variety will need a BIOS update in order to support them fully. Every platform which we tested the chip on required a BIOS update of some sort in order to obtain full functionality. Luckily, all motherboards we tried already had BIOS releases out and readily available.

Intel Core 2 Duo E7200 - The New Budget Superstar?

Intel helped launch their 45nm processors with the QX9650 in November, and then proceeded to release their mid-range Dual-Cores in late January and finally, their low-end and mid-range Quad-Cores late last month. So you might be asking, "where are the low-end Dual-Cores?" Good question, and one we'll help answer today.

The E7200 will be the first "value" model that Intel will launch, and for the most part, it's kind of like a Q9300 split right down the middle. The difference is that while the Q9300 utilizes a 1333MHz FSB, the E7200 sticks to the "stock" option of the 65nm models, at 1066MHz FSB. This in itself is a big improvement, since the most comparable 65nm Dual-Core, the E4700, uses an 800MHz FSB.

The rumored launch date for the E7200 is next month, but that conflicts with the "Q2" launch date that Intel's press relations gave us. Similar to the 45nm Quad-Core launch, Intel likely still has many 65nm low-end Dual-Cores and would like to clear some of them out first, before officially launching the E7200 and others. So at this point, the release date is up in the air, but it will probably prove a lot sooner than later.

With its unique 9.5x multiplier, the E7200 hits a stock clock frequency of 2.53GHz and includes 3 MB of L2 cache, 1.5 MB per core. This is unlike the mid-range Dual-Cores, such as the E8400, which includes 6 MB of L2 cache. Whether or not that decrease will affect performance is something our benchmarks will help explain.

Closer Look at the Core 2 Duo E7200

Like the E4xxx series before it, the E7xxx series is designed for value-conscious consumers who want a solid CPU that will help get the job done. They don't boast extreme performance, but as we've come to find out well over the past few years, even Intel's lower-end Core 2 Duo offerings are well worth the time... even with overclocking out of the picture.

The E7200 still contains a 65W TDP, so while it's a lower-end model, it's not meant to be more energy-efficient over the mid-range E8xxx series. Thanks to 45nm enhancements however, improved efficiency should result in an overall wattage drain decrease over previous 65nm products.

Processor Name	Cores	Clock	Cache	FSB	TDP	1Ku Price	Available
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775	4	3.20GHz	2 x 6MB	1600MHz	150W	$1,499	Now
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770	4	3.20GHz	2 x 6MB	1600MHz	136W	$1,399	Now
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650	4	3.0GHz	2 x 6MB	1333MHz	130W	$999	Now
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550	4	2.86GHz	2 x 6MB	1333MHz	95W	$530	Now
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450	4	2.66GHz	2 x 6MB	1333MHz	95W	$316	Now
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300	4	2.5GHz	2 x 3MB	1333MHz	95W	$266	Now
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500	2	3.16GHz	6MB	1333MHz	65W	$266	Now
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400	2	3.00GHz	6MB	1333MHz	65W	$183	Now
Intel Core 2 Duo E8200	2	2.66GHz	6MB	1333MHz	65W	$163	Now
Intel Core 2 Duo E8190	2	2.66GHz	6MB	1333MHz	65W	$163	Now
Intel Core 2 Duo E7200	2	2.53GHz	3MB	1066MHz	65W	~$133	May 2008

The E7200 would prove a great choice for most anyone, regardless of the intention. It would fit well in a general-use PC, it could well handle high-definition content in an HTPC, and even has the power to deliver superb gaming performance, as we'll see later. For the projected $133 USD (to retailer) price, the E7200 looks to be one heck of a offering.

Bottom: QX9650

To recap, while we are unsure of the actual release date and price, we wouldn't be surprised to see it launch next month with a $133USD (/1,000) price tag. Rumors have been rampant, so it could very well happen. We're just not willing to put money on it quite yet.

So, let's get right to some benchmarking! On the following page, we explain in-depth how our testing methodology works, then we'll jump into our SYSmark and PCMark tests, followed by many more.

International Directory of Company Histories

Public Company Incorporated: 1968 as N M Electronics Employees: 70,200 Sales: $34.21 billion (2004) Stock Exchanges: NASDAQ Ticker Symbol: INTC NAIC: 334413 Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing; 334210 Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing

Intel Corporation is the largest semiconductor manufacturer in the world, with 11 fabrication facilities and six assembly and test facilities around the world. Intel has changed the global marketplace dramatically since it was founded in 1968; the company invented the microprocessor, the "computer on a chip" that made possible the first handheld calculators and personal computers (PCs). By the early 21st century, Intel's microprocessors were found in approximately 80 percent of PCs worldwide. The company's product line also includes chipsets and motherboards; flash memory used in wireless communications and other applications; networking devices and equipment for accessing the Internet, local area networks, and home networks; and embedded control microchips used in networking products, laser printers, factory automation instruments, cellular phone base stations, and other applications. Intel has remained competitive through a combination of clever marketing, well-supported research and development, superior manufacturing proficiency, a vital corporate culture, prowess in legal matters, and an ongoing alliance with software giant Microsoft Corporation often referred to as "Wintel."

1968–79: From DRAM to the 8086

Intel's founders, Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore, were among the eight founders of Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, established in 1957. While at Fairchild, Noyce and Moore invented the integrated circuit; in 1968, they decided to form their own company. They were soon joined by Andrew Grove, a Hungarian refugee who had arrived in the United States in 1956 and joined Fairchild in 1963. Grove would remain president and CEO of Intel into the 1990s.

To obtain start-up capital, Noyce and Moore approached Arthur Rock, a venture capitalist, with a one-page business plan simply stating their intention of developing large-scale integrated circuits. Rock, who had helped start Fairchild Semiconductor, as well as Teledyne and Scientific Data Systems, had confidence in Noyce and Moore and provided $3 million in capital. The company was incorporated on July 18, 1968, as N M Electronics (the letters standing for Noyce Moore), but quickly changed its name to Intel, formed from the first syllables of "integrated electronics." Intel gathered another $2 million in capital before going public in 1971.

Noyce and Moore's scanty business proposal belied a clear plan to produce large-scale integrated (LSI) semiconductor memories. At that time, semiconductor memories were ten times more expensive than standard magnetic core memories. Costs were falling, however, and Intel's founders surmised that with the greater speed and efficiency of LSI technology, semi-conductors would soon replace magnetic cores. Within a few months of its startup, Intel produced the 3101 Schottky bipolar memory, a high-speed random access memory (RAM) chip. The 3101 proved popular enough to sustain the company until the 1101, a metal oxide semiconductor (MOS) chip, was perfected and introduced in 1969. The following year, Intel introduced the 1103, a 1-kilobyte (K) dynamic RAM, or DRAM, which was the first chip large enough to store a significant amount of information. With the 1103, Intel finally had a chip that really did begin to replace magnetic cores; DRAMs eventually proved indispensable to the personal computer.

Although Intel initially focused on the microprocessor as a computer enhancement that would allow users to add more memory to their units, the microprocessor's great potential—for everything from calculators to cash registers and traffic lights—soon became clear. The applications were facilitated by Intel's introduction of the 8008, an 8-bit microprocessor developed along with the 4004 but oriented toward data and character (rather than arithmetic) manipulation. The 8080, introduced in 1974, was the first truly general purpose microprocessor. For $360, Intel sold a whole computer on one chip, while conventional computers sold for thousands of dollars. The response was overwhelming. The 8080 soon became the industry standard and Intel the industry leader in the 8-bit market.

In response to ensuing competition in the manufacture of 8-bit microprocessors, Intel introduced the 8085, a faster chip with more functions. The company was also developing two more advanced projects, the 32-bit 432 and the 16-bit 8086. The 8086 was introduced in 1978 but took two years to achieve wide use, and, during this time, Motorola, Inc. produced a competing chip (the 68000) that seemed to be selling faster. Intel responded with a massive sales effort to establish its architecture as the standard. When International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) chose the 8008, the 8086's 8-bit cousin, for its personal computer in 1980, Intel seemed to have beat out the competition.