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 Intel BX80571E7500 Core2 E7500 Duo
Blank
 Newegg $115.99
 BestBuy $129.99
 TigerDirect $119.99
 
 

Application Performance using SYSMark 2004 SE

We'll kick off our look at general application performance with SYSMark 2004 SE as always, and we'll look at the overall score as well as the scores in each of the two suites - Internet Content Creation and Office productivity.

General Performance - SYSmark 2004

Clock-for-clock, Intel's Core 2 Duo is able to outperform its predecessor by 13% according to SYSMark 2004 SE's overall score. While the performance advantage isn't as dramatic as what we've seen on the desktop, comparing Core 2 to Pentium D, at 13% we're still looking at a performance gain that is noticeable in real world usage.

General Performance - SYSmark 2004

Drilling deeper and looking at the overall Internet Content Creation score, Core 2 Duo's performance advantage drops slightly to 10.7%. The performance increases we're seeing here highlight one very important point in current CPU architecture innovation. We're looking at a 10% increase in performance here, yet it required a 93% increase in transistor count to achieve (mostly because of the larger L2 cache, 4MB vs. 2MB). AMD and Intel are both looking to multi-core solutions to deliver better performance-per-transistor efficiency, rather than simply throwing more clock speed and cache at the problem.

General Performance - SYSmark 2004

Speaking of the impacts of a larger L2 cache, we may be seeing those here in the Office Productivity suite where Core 2 Duo holds a 15.1% lead over Core Duo. The advantage is large enough to be noticeable, and definitely appreciated when you look at the fact that the Core 2 Duo we're benchmarking here has the same MSRP as its Core Duo predecessor.

The performance increases also come from the modified pipeline and internals, but we will have to get ahold of a 2MB Merom chip to determine exactly how much of the improvement comes from the added cache and how much comes from the reworked architecture.

The breakdown of SYSMark 2004 SE tests are below:

General Performance - SYSmark 2004

General Performance - SYSmark 2004

General Performance - SYSmark 2004

General Performance - SYSmark 2004

General Performance - SYSmark 2004

General Performance - SYSmark 2004

Application Performance using PC WorldBench 5   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, 346 days ago
Username:
Password:
Whats the Asterisk mean? by Tiamat, 1286 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, 1286 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, 1286 days ago
Video makes ALL the difference in the world.

Reply
RE: Video by monsoon, 1286 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, 1286 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, 1286 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, 1284 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, 1232 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, 1286 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, 1286 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

 February 9, 2010

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank

 February 8, 2010

Blank


more CPU & Chipset Discussions



pipeboost
Copyright © 1997-2010 AnandTech, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms, Conditions and Privacy Information.
Click Here for Advertising Information