Model Numbers Galore

Just like the outgoing Core Duo processor, Intel's Core 2 Duo lineup uses its arbitrarily determined model number system.  While the previous Core Duo chips were all numbered as T2000 series processors, the new Core 2 Duos are all T7000 and T5000 chips.  The T5000 models feature a 2MB L2 cache while the T7000 have a full 4MB L2, and as the name implies all of these CPUs are dual core. 

The table below features all of the Core 2 Duo parts that will be available this quarter:

 CPU Clock Speed FSB L2 Cache Price

Intel Core 2 Duo T7600

2.33GHz

667MHz

4MB

$637

Intel Core 2 Duo T7400

2.16GHz

667MHz

4MB

$423

Intel Core 2 Duo T7200

2.00GHz

667MHz

4MB

$294

Intel Core 2 Duo T5600

1.83GHz

667MHz

2MB

$241

Intel Core Duo T2700

2.33GHz

667MHz

2MB

$637

Intel Core Duo T2600

2.16GHz

667MHz

2MB

$423

Intel Core Duo T2500

2.00GHz

667MHz

2MB

$294

Intel Core Duo T2400

1.83GHz

667MHz

2MB

$241

Intel Core Duo T2300

1.66GHz

667MHz

2MB

$241

Intel Core Duo T2300E*

1.66GHz

667MHz

2MB

$209

*Note: These CPUs lack Intel Virtualization Technology (VT) support)

The Core 2 Duo lineup that's being introduced this quarter shows one common theme: price parity.  The new Core 2 Duo processors are available at the same clock speeds as the now "old" Core Duo processors and at the same price.  For the same price you do get a faster CPU and in most cases twice the L2 cache, but we'll save the performance and battery life comparisons for later on in the review. 

The point of Intel's pricing strategy with Core 2 Duo on the mobile side is to quickly phase out out Core Duo and replace it with Core 2 Duo.  The chart below details Intel's plans to ramp Core 2 Duo in its mobile segment:

You'll note that Intel is quite aggressive with ramping Core 2 Duo up, but going into 2007 over a quarter of Intel's mobile processor shipments will still be Core Duo. 

Index 2007 Mobile Roadmap
POST A COMMENT

46 Comments

View All Comments

  • saleemi - Saturday, February 28, 2009 - link

    what is the difference between Dual Core and Core 2 Duo processor?
    I want to buy a laptop what i will do?
    Can some body please explain the difference..
    Reply
  • kem - Thursday, December 06, 2007 - link

    I have a notebook with a 940GML / Celeron 440. Can i upgrade to a CoreDuo FSB533? Reply
  • tatpeng - Sunday, December 02, 2007 - link

    Anand,

    I would like seek your advice. I want to buy laptop but i confused on the Centrino Duo Core 2 Duo and Intel Core 2 Duo. I looking at the Acer Aspire Laptop Centrino Duo Core 2 Duo and Compaq Presario Intel Core 2 Duo. So i would like to know the difference. Please assist. Both is Core2 Duo but the Acer is with Centrino. Is Acer better or Compaq better?
    Reply
  • a rabbit - Wednesday, August 30, 2006 - link

    Hi,

    A few questions:

    (1) Can we assume that the power draw numbers represent the best possible performance one can expect from Core 2 Duo mobile systems one can purchase today, or, should we assume that they represent typical performance, or, can we say we don't know because we only used one sample of Core 2 Duo?

    (2) What about the Core Duo (Yonah)? Theoretically, if Intel supplied all CPUs to the reviewer, I as Intel would supply the best quality (lowest power draw) Core 2 Duo, and the worst quality (highest power draw) Core Duo for my reviewer to perform the review on.

    Thanks!

    -a rabbit
    Reply
  • chetech - Friday, August 11, 2006 - link

    Can a Core 2 Duo processor be fitted into an Apple Mac Mini using their new Intel Core Duo processors? Reply
  • wimh - Thursday, August 10, 2006 - link

    quote:

    one of the funny things about performance and battery life is that if you can complete a task quickly enough thus returning your CPU to an idle state faster, battery life will grow even though instantaneous power consumption may be higher.


    Actually this is not correct: a CPU that's clocked higher also needs a higer voltage. Therefore, doing the same amount of work faster will require more energy than spreading it out over a longer time (in theory).
    For this to be true in practice, you'll off course need to factor other things into account, like I/O-devices (which may have less choice in sleep states: keeping the hard disk spinning for a longer time can destroy the gain you had by slowing down the CPU), etc...
    Reply
  • devilzangel - Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - link

    .
    "Eventually" we will have processors based on light particles vs electrons; but that is "eventually"; lets talk about the very near mobile future shall we (1 year).

    1. EM64T enabling - Will DEFINATELY boost and widen the performance gap b/w Core D & Core2 D. Especially with the Vista 64bit OS system installed. EVEN when u run 32bit applications on it.

    2. Quad-Core 'Santa Rosa' - Another great stride by Intel to boost performance (of course at the expense of battery life (which i might add, shouldnt matter much since most laptop users use the laptop near AC outlets). I am definately going to wait until next year to upgrade to a new laptop. Plus Vista will take advantage of the extra cores.

    3. FSB, and Battery Life - Comon, lets not fool ourselves; Intel can full well come out with a 1066 config for mobiles WHENEVER they want. AND mobile MOBO can be fabricated to take advantage of it JUST as fast. BATTERY life is the ONLY culprit. I would be the FIRST to buy such a laptop. Why use a clumsy desktop with so much wattage when you can get slightly less performance with much better gains to offset the balance regardless. Lets get one thing straight ... Desktops are losing ground, Laptops are the future.

    4. Shared L2 Memory Cache - The 1st Core D processors were CRUDE at best in this regard. Core 2 D Proc.s will SHARE the FULL L2 cache.

    Ehh who knows what will happen in 2008, and 2009 .. IBM and Georgia Tech's 300GHZ (room temperature) processors may be producable by that time ..

    Sometimes, I feel as if the corporate giants stagger the new technology into consumer hands in stages so that they may reap the profits.

    devilzangel
    Reply
  • ViperV990 - Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - link

    Regarding the FSB vs battery life issue, can't they just throttle the FSB dynamically like they do with the multiplier? I mean, come on, I've been able to change the FSB speed on the fly using software since like what, the Celeron 300A days?

    (Forgive me if that was possible earlier. My earliest overclocking experience was with a Klamath P II 266...)
    Reply
  • devilzangel - Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - link

    In the older processors and mobos it may have been easier to access this code settings to allow HIGHER speeds than mentioned limits ..

    normal throttling of CPU, Cache, FSB, Fanspeed etc, is part of the architecture (or so i understand it to be) .. 'Over'throttling the FSB is something i am unsure of .. at best it is a risk.

    recently though, most (if not almost all) boards have such options blocked or hidden in Bios settings and chip configurations (except the higher end GA, Asus, DFI, Abit boards).. ofcourse it very possible (and it wouldnt surprise me if it is) that the Core 2 D are ALREADY capable of 1066FSB but the chips have been locked onto 667, or 800 (the architecture of the C2D desktop chips is pretty much identical to the meroms, almost); it is possible that such mobile settings may be unstable if someone managed to crack the coding and change the frequency settings. The causes could range from MOBO coding chips, to Heat issues

    It is kind of like apple; we the consumers found out around the beginning of this year that Apple always had a somewhat working version of their OS for intel hardware settings.

    remember the technology staggering .. the FSB is part of it. It is like Diamonds, and Oil; limit the supply of higher and faster technology to increase the chances of a higher profit history overall.

    devilzangel
    Reply
  • IsLNdbOi - Monday, August 07, 2006 - link

    I've got a Toshiba U205-S5002 which has a 945GM chipset. This article says that the 945GM supports Core 2 Duo. I need to find out now if the processor in my laptop has a PGA Socket-M or BGA CPU. I've checked Toshiba's support pages, but can't find any info. regarding the CPU's interface w/ the mobo.

    Anyone have any info. regarding the U205-S5002's CPU interface?
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now