Motherboards Memory Storage Cases/Cooling/PSUs IT Computing Displays Mobile Mac CPUs & Chipsets Video Digital Cameras Linux Gadgets Systems Trade Shows Guides Home Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Change Page Size
Mobile CPU Wars: Core 2 Duo vs. Core Duo
Mobile CPU Wars: Core 2 Duo vs. Core Duo
Date: August 3rd, 2006
Topic: CPU & Chipset
Manufacturer: Intel
Author: Anand Lal Shimpi
Buy the Duo E7500 2.93GHz Core2Duo Processor
Blank
 
 

Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo

We've spent a lot of time comparing Intel's Core architecture to NetBurst and AMD's K8; however, we've stayed away from quite possibly one of the most confusing comparisons: Core 2 Duo vs. Core Duo. 

Unlike its desktop predecessor, Core 2 Duo comes from the same genealogy as the Core Duo.  Despite the similarities in name and in architecture, there are some fairly major differences between the two CPUs, some of which won't become apparent until next year.  The table below should help summarize the differences:

  Core Duo (Yonah) Core 2 Duo (Merom)

Manufacturing Process

65nm

65nm

Die Size

90.3 mm^2

144.9 mm^2

Transistors

151M

291M

Clock Speeds

1.20GHz - 2.33GHz

1.06GHz - 2.4GHz+

FSB Frequency

533MHz - 667MHz

533MHz - 800MHz

L1 Cache Size

32KB + 32KB

32KB + 32KB

L2 Cache Size

2MB Shared

2MB - 4MB Shared

Pipeline Stages

12

14

Decoders

1 complex + 2 simple

1 complex + 3 simple

Maximum Decode Rate

3

4+1

Reorder Buffer

80

96

Issue Ports

5

6

Scheduling

Unified Reservation Station

Unified Reservation Station

Scheduler (# of Entries)

24

32

FP Units

FMUL/FADD:  1

FMUL:  1
FADD:  1
FSTORE:  1
FLOAD:  1

SSE Units

1

3

Integer Units

ALU:  2

AGU:  2

ALU:  3

AGU:  2

Load/Store Units

Load:  1

Store:  1

Load:  1

Store:  1

Socket Interface

Socket-M (PGA/BGA)

Socket-M (PGA/BGA) & Socket-P (PGA/BGA)

 

Compared to the desktop Core 2 Duo (Conroe), the mobile version is architecturally no different.  Obviously clock speeds (both CPU and FSB) are lower because these things will be going in notebooks where power consumption is more of a concern, but other than that the architectures are identical. 

Compared to Yonah, Merom has some very clear advantages; on the surface the larger L2 cache is responsible for the 140M increase in transistor count, but architecturally the improvements extend far beyond that.  You can get the details from the table above or from our previous articles on Intel's Core 2 processors, but simply put Merom is wider and slightly deeper than Yonah.  The slightly deeper pipeline helps increase clock speeds on Merom (which will bump performance a bit), but the added decode and execution width will increase overall performance.

Not listed in the table above are the improvements to the cache subsystem and memory accesses on Core 2 Duo.  Merom features more aggressive prefetchers than Yonah, as well as Intel's Memory Disambiguation technology that allows for out of order loads.  In other words, not only is Merom able to operate on more data at once, at a faster speed, but it can also get access to that data quicker. 

New CPU today, new platform in 2007

The first versions of Core 2 Duo are completely backwards compatible with the Napa platform that Core Duo currently uses, and thus they share the same Socket-M interface.  Unfortunately for Merom, Napa only supports a maximum of a 667MHz FSB and thus has almost 40% less bandwidth to the CPU than the desktop version, and is identical to what the fastest Yonah CPUs use.  The problem with FSB limiting Merom like this is that Merom is a hungrier core (as we've seen by the table above) than Yonah, so it needs a faster FSB in order to truly stretch its legs.  The tradeoff is that a faster FSB consumes more power, thus reducing battery life, not to mention that you'll need a "new" chipset to support the faster FSB. 

That new chipset is part of Intel's Santa Rosa platform, to be introduced in early 2007.  Santa Rosa is composed of Intel's upcoming Mobile 965 chipset, ICH8M and a new wireless solution with 802.11n support.  The new chipset will add official 800MHz FSB support, and thus Core 2 Duo processors released next year will be able to use the faster FSB.  The Santa Rosa platform also introduces a new pin-out, Socket-P, for Core 2 Duo processors.  Unfortunately that means you won't be able to use current Core 2 Duo and Core Duo processors in Santa Rosa based motherboards and notebooks. 

The Test Platform   Next Page

 
  Index

Tools Share
Find lowest prices Find the lowest prices
Digg   del.icio.us   E-mail  
Print This Article Print this article  

46 Comments - Last by saleemi, 265 days ago
Username:
Password:
Whats the Asterisk mean? by Tiamat, 1205 days ago
Whats the difference between the Intel Core Duo T2300E* and the Intel Core Duo T2300E?

I see a difference in price, but not specs. The page in the article does not address the asterisk...

Reply
RE: Whats the Asterisk mean? by Anand Lal Shimpi, 1205 days ago
The asterisk means that the CPU lacks support for Intel Virtualization Technology (VT). I had the note on Page 3 but I forgot to include it on Page 2 :) Thanks for the heads up :)

Take care,
Anand


Reply
Video by bob661, 1205 days ago
Video makes ALL the difference in the world.

Reply
RE: Video by monsoon, 1205 days ago
I'm in the market for a mini PC to do video trancode, and I was considering the MEROM chip to compare to YONAH...

...in the end, given the right graphic card ( add ATI X1400 series or higher here ) with hardware embedded transcode features, i guess the YONAH fits my bill just right.

And i get to pay 100$ or 200$ less than the same computer with a MEROM which could not offer me better on the video side...

What do you think ?

Reply
RE: Video by bob661, 1205 days ago
I would get the best video you can get with the cash saved from getting the Memron.

Reply
The cache vs core effect on performance by jones377, 1205 days ago
It was interesting to compare the numbers in this review with the previous Core 2 Duo desktop review where 2MB vs 4MB L2 cache was examined (although at 1,83GHz/1066)

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=4

Its not a perfect comparison but from what I can gather, there are significant improvements performance wise coming from the core, even in the non-FP/SSE related benchmarks. A favorite argument among some people is that the extra cache makes all the difference, I hope this will shut them up! (tho I really doubt it)

Reply
RE: The cache vs core effect on performance by IntelUser2000, 1203 days ago
quote:

It was interesting to compare the numbers in this review with the previous Core 2 Duo desktop review where 2MB vs 4MB L2 cache was examined (although at 1,83GHz/1066)

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=4

Its not a perfect comparison but from what I can gather, there are significant improvements performance wise coming from the core, even in the non-FP/SSE related benchmarks. A favorite argument among some people is that the extra cache makes all the difference, I hope this will shut them up! (tho I really doubt it)


Correct. Lots of the benchmarks show 10% advantage for Core 2 Duo over Core Duo. The only 10% advantage 4MB L2 over 2MB L2 is in a single app.

Reply
RE: The cache vs core effect on performance by iollmann, 1152 days ago

In SSE code, I see close to a factor of 2 performance increase from Yonah to Merom much of the time. These benchmarks are depressing. The improvement should be better than what we see. Does no one vectorize?

Reply
yes!! by yacoub, 1205 days ago
now this is a test i can totally appreciate: everything is identical except the CPU, so you get to see what the REAL WORLD benefit of changing the CPU is in your REAL WORLD system that people might actually buy/own. ie, instead of maxing everything else out with parts 99% of people don't buy / can't afford.

of course the result is that you see that the real world difference is only noticeable in some situations and with some programs. but hey, that's the reality of it and actually it's easy to see that since the pricing is comparable and all else the same, it's a decent upgrade and certainly a level of future-proofing as well.

Reply
Copy/pasted too much again? by Olaf van der Spek, 1205 days ago
quote:

Our final battery life test centers around wireless internet browsing, and thus we could only test the three Compaqs in this roundup that featured built in wireless.


What three Compaqs?

Reply
Comments Page 1 of 5

Unlicensed Software at Your Last Company
Anonymously Report Unlicensed Software with Our Form Now. Get Up to $1 Million.
We Buy Laptop and PC Memory! Sell to Us!
Min of 25 pieces required. Call us today at 239.354.1230.
Special Offer from The Economist
Get 12 issues of The Economist for $12. US subscribers only.
Free Forrester Risk Management Report
Demystifying Enterprise Risk Management. Download Free With Registration.
Download Microsoft Visual Studio ® Team System
Streamline Dev processes, Reduce time to market. Try Microsoft Visual Studio Team System, FREE!




Latest news by
DailyTech

 November 20, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank

 November 19, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank


Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
more CPU & Chipset Discussions



pipeboost
Copyright © 1997-2009 AnandTech, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms, Conditions and Privacy Information.
Click Here for Advertising Information