How fast is a core duo?

[Spanky Deluxe]

Core 2 Duo's have already been OC'd to 3.8/4Ghz.

i may buy a mini just to play with OC'ing and use as a renderer.

I don't think there are any overclocking tools for OS X and Intel chips right now, I'm sure it'll come but not for a while.

I've heard that the Core Duos are about 70mph and the Core 2 Duos can get up to 85 on a good day. Apart from when using Photoshop, then they get stuck in 3rd gear which is a bit of a drag.

 

[michaelrjohnson]

fast.

In comparison to my 1.33Ghz G4, it sure is.

BTW: My response was going to be, "Based on the thread title and your original post, 2.0GHz."

 

[MacsRgr8]

Anyone knows hwo fast the Core Duo 2.0 GHz is running PC games?

The problem with most games, is that they do not use a 2nd core. So, I wonder how well a Core Duo 2.0 GHz will perform against a P4 3.8 GHz with all the rest similar (same amount of RAM, same HD setup, same grfx card..) running the latest PC games.

Maybe I should alter the question:
How well does a Core Solo 2.0 GHz compare to a P4 3.8 GHz?

 

[Makosuke]

Here's one set of benchmarks that I haven't seen linked that include the Core Duo at 2.16GHZ (the base T2600 model) as well as the same chip overclocked to 2.6GHz for the heck of it. There are some number crunching figures, and some games:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/05/19/intel_core_duo_t2600_on_the_desktop/1.html

You'll notice that the non-overclocked Core Duo (same one in my MBP) performs quite well in *most* areas even relative to high end "Desktop" chips from both Intel and AMD.

Here's a much broader benchmark:
http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q2/core-duo/index.x?pg=1

This one includes a huge selection of high-end chips and a LOT of different benchmarks. Again, the 2.16GHz Core Duo generally performs at least around the middle of the road compared to "top of the line" desktop processors, and in some case actually runs faster than them. Their conclusion is telling:

Based on what we've seen, one can't help but conclude the Core Duo's performance per watt is unmatched in the world of PC processors. The Core Duo is obviously the best mobile CPU on the market, more than doubling the peak performance of the Pentium M while operating in the same power envelope. What's more shocking is the fact that the Core Duo T2600's outright performance is easily superior to Intel's supposed flagship desktop processor, the Pentium Extreme Edition 965.

 

[QCassidy352]

Have you checked out Apple's SPEC benchmarks of the iMac Core Duo? they claim that the 2.0ghz Core Duo is 3.2x faster than a 2.1ghz G5 for integer, and 2.1x faster for floating point. Yes, it's a dual core processor compared to a single core one, but it's very, very fast. Now you might say Apple is cheating on the Core Duo benchmarks.. but people said they cheated on the G5 benchmarks too, so what else is new?

Moreover, I have a dual 2.7ghz G5 machine, and a 1.83ghz Core Duo machine, and the speed is pretty comparable.

no, I haven't checked out apple's benchmarks. I try to spend as little time in the reality distortion field as possible.

All of the real world benchmarks I've seen show the core duo running roughly even to the G5 at the same clock speed, all else being equal (which, of course, it isn't).

a 1.83 core duo equal to a 2.7 G5? I'd LOVE to see the numbers that bear that out.

 

[Willis]

Two frequencies can't be added like that. So, when they say that a dual core CPU runs at 2GHz, each core runs on a 2GHz clock signal.

so a 2ghz core duo is like... two 2ghz processors... running together.. =|

Ive never really thought about it. Too used to single core's

 

[macenforcer]

I did photoshop speed tests on my macbook 2ghz core duo vs my Pentium D 940 3.2ghz and the macbook is slightly faster by like 5 seconds on the horse test image. The macbook also beats the Dual 2ghz G5.

 

[breakfastcrew]

Here's one set of benchmarks that I haven't seen linked that include the Core Duo at 2.16GHZ (the base T2600 model) as well as the same chip overclocked to 2.6GHz for the heck of it. There are some number crunching figures, and some games:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/05/19/intel_core_duo_t2600_on_the_desktop/1.html

You'll notice that the non-overclocked Core Duo (same one in my MBP) performs quite well in *most* areas even relative to high end "Desktop" chips from both Intel and AMD.

Here's a much broader benchmark:
http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q2/core-duo/index.x?pg=1

This one includes a huge selection of high-end chips and a LOT of different benchmarks. Again, the 2.16GHz Core Duo generally performs at least around the middle of the road compared to "top of the line" desktop processors, and in some case actually runs faster than them. Their conclusion is telling:

ah thats what I wanted to hear thx

 

[mmmcheese]

The chip is crap until it can run Adobe.

Then I will be interested.

Not to nitpick, but you can...both emulated and native. Of course I assume you meant to specify on OSX...which you're stuck with emulated...but it still works. Of course I have to also assume you meant to specify natively on OSX.

But I'll let you get away with it this time.



FAKE EDIT: But hey, emulated is still an upgrade over how it ran on my G3...

 

[risc]

Have you checked out Apple's SPEC benchmarks of the iMac Core Duo? they claim ...

Apple claim a lot of stuff.

 

[DavidC1]

Here's one set of benchmarks that I haven't seen linked that include the Core Duo at 2.16GHZ (the base T2600 model) as well as the same chip overclocked to 2.6GHz for the heck of it. There are some number crunching figures, and some games:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...desktop/1.html

You'll notice that the non-overclocked Core Duo (same one in my MBP) performs quite well in *most* areas even relative to high end "Desktop" chips from both Intel and AMD.

Here's a much broader benchmark:
http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q2...o/index.x?pg=1

This one includes a huge selection of high-end chips and a LOT of different benchmarks. Again, the 2.16GHz Core Duo generally performs at least around the middle of the road compared to "top of the line" desktop processors, and in some case actually runs faster than them. Their conclusion is telling:

Not really a good benchmark as you will be using default 945GM chipset on imac/macbook not the BIOS-optimized, top-notch memory, power hungry, top-notch chipset that doesn't support Core Duo called 975X. This is relevant: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2648

and this: http://www.anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.aspx?i=2663

You don't need Core Solo to compare to Pentium 4. You can compare Core Duo to a Pentium D. There are 3.6GHz Pentium D which has essentially the same Pentium 4 3.6GHz performance in single-thread.

 

[Scarlet Fever]

Apple claim a lot of stuff.

they claimed the Mini had better graphics than the average computer because it had a dedicated GPU... then they put in integrated GPU in... and claimed it was good enough

anyway... back to OT... its fast

 

[nospleen]

The chip is crap until it can run Adobe.

Then I will be interested.

The dark side young Skywalker?!?!

 

[Mac Rules]

So how does the Core 2 Duo compare to, lets say, a 3.2GHz P4? Is it worth waiting for Santa Rosa, even if its just for an increased FSB, or will there be an increase in clock speed. I've head they might update the graphics by then aswell?

Cheers

 

[MacsRgr8]

We have all gone to the Dark Side... Darth Intel.

Luke PPCWalker will not fail.

 

[Chundles]

I'll go with post number 2 on this - a 2.0GHz Core Duo whoops any released Pentium 4.

I can condense it down to three letters:

V.F.Q.

 

[Miguel0019]

I believe that for almost any task, a 2ghz Core Duo is faster than any Pentium 4 that was ever released. I have seen benchmarks to suggest this, but I have also seen benchmarks to suggest otherwise. The best way that I can think of off the top of my head to compare this, is that according to Apple's own benchmarks, the G5 compared favorably to the Pentium 4, and the Core Duo is much faster than the G5.

You're 100% right.