Core 2 Due VS Pentuim D

S

sonxEr77

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2006
Messages
1,809
Reaction score
0
Location
around
Core 2 due which came out less than three months seems to be faster than Pentium D dual core..

PS: Core 2 due 1.86Ghz faster than Pentium D 3.4Ghz... Anymore info regarding this?
 
Its is true, the Intel Core 2 Duo is a much faster and efficient (cooler running) architecture and thas E6300 (1,86GHz) beats even the 3.6 Pentium D models in 98% of tests.
 
well intel's new cpu's has followed in amd's footsteps

its not about the speed anymore

that E6300 can overclock to around 2.2 - 2.4 maybe higher but i dont think so

i dont think there was an intel chip as fast as the e6300 which beats amd top of line fx 62 which is around 7k
 
Its probably just a software or human error lol, the system described in there is still right (aka modern stuff), they didnt have that back in 1969 lol
 
First 3 google results indicate overclock speeds for the E6300 of:

AnandTech : 2.592GHz
HardwareZone : 3.36GHz
X-bit labs : 2.940 GHz

... quite a range
 
ummm those overclocks?

did it involve nitrogen because if it did then its rather stupid because what user is going to use nitrogen hahaha
 
i dont think there was an intel chip as fast as the e6300 which beats AMD top of line fx 62 which is around 7k
Click to expand...
No please don't' exaggerate people. This is getting ridiculous now. Core2 is fast but not that fast. FX62 blows the E6300 out of the water. Lets not get ahead of ourselves here. It's nice that Intel is back in the game, but this type of exaggeration is misleading.
 
dude you need to do some research :)

dont who told you that the amd 62 is better than the e6300

because they lied

http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2802


yes its overclocked to 2.5 but anyone can do overclock to those speeds :)

in some of thjose bench's the e6300 overclocked is only slightly better yes, but if you consider there is around a 5k difference its kicks the 62's ass
 
Last edited:
I mean who pays 7K for a CPU ???.
I would be crying right now if it was me consider what Core 2 can do for so much cheaper.
 
Slow you roll. You are not talking to a N00b here. I been having high end CPU's for years now and what I talk about is not another's words, they are my own experiences and with hardware I have. I have a FX62 and an X6800 with me, I've had a QX6700, E6700, 6600 and 6400 with me so you should be the last person telling me to do some research as I can test all of these things myself...

In that anandtech review, nowhere is the E6300 faster than the FX62 except when it's overclocked, at which point it's not an E6300! E6600 is faster than FX62 and that's true but that's E6600. The others below it are not.

Don't say overclocking or whatnot, because that is not a fair comparison. Product for product the FX62 is faster and the benchmarks pointed too show that. Don't get ahead of yourself.
 
ummm shock - g if i go out and buy an e6300 overclock and its beats an amd 62 im going to tell ppl its an e6300 for 1500 that beats a fx 62 that costs 7k

the fact of the matter is i bought an e6300 overclocked and it out performed an fx 62?

are you denying that an e6300 that i bought for 1500 is faster than amd's top of line cpu when overclocked?

these cpu's where made to be overclocked and that is one the biggest reason's ppl love them

fact:
e6300 overclocked for R1500.00 rand beats amd's top of range 7k cpu

why is overclocking not a fair comparison?
these cpu's overclock really well and dont run very hot

i think it shouldnt be fair that a R1500 rand cpu can out perform a 7k cpu

thats totally unfair

wow amd must smile everytime they sell a fx 62 now
 
No CPU is made for overclocking.
Once again since when do we use overclocking results to compare CPU's?

When asked which is better better between the Athlon64 3000+ and the Pentium4 D 950. you can't use the overclocked 2.8GHz of the A64 and say it's a better CPU. That's not true. People who overclock are less than 5% of the buying public.
 
the arguement isnt about the general public its about cpu that if configured correctly can beat an AMD fx 62

yes the general buying public wont overclock but then again they wouldnt buy an amd 62 fx now would they :)

cpu where not suppose to be overclocked?
then why do these intels overclock so well and by so much?

I know you like AMD i did as well until i saw how we where paying 1600 rand for a 3400+ then core 2 came out and it was cut in half

how long had they been ripping us off?

screw amd, intel is by far cheaper in performance

take intel's 7k cpu vs amd's 7k hahahaha what a joke at stock level as well
 
ShockG said:
No CPU is made for overclocking.
Click to expand...

Nonsense.

Intel/AMD makes all their chips using the same processes and then they take a wafer and tests a sample of only one or more chips on it to see which speed it is stable at and then all the CPU's on the wafer is marked at that speed.

So an E6600 wafer that fails that speed is remarked as either E6400's or E6300's instead and half of the cache zapped and there will obviously be some chips on that wafer that might have passed the higher clockspeed tests had Intel spent the time and money to test all of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X