On 4 Dec 2006 13:15:47 -0800, "Craig" <craig_wilson_p.DeleteThis@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>I'm comparing a couple of systems and one has a Pentium D Processor 800
>w/ Dual Core (2.8 ghz, 800 fsb) and the other had Intel Core 2 Duo
>Processor E6300 (1.86 ghz, 1066 fsb). Since the Pentium D has more ghz
>2.8 vs the 1.86 I was wondering how much faster the Core 2 Duo would
Quite substantially faster. The following review has some benchmarks
with both chips:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795
The Core 2 Duo 6300 is typically between 20 and 30% faster than the
Pentium D 820 when it comes to overall system performance. In some
processor-intensive tasks it's more like 40% faster.
The Core 2 Duo also consumes less power than the Pentium D 820, their
respective TDPs (Thermal Design Power, roughly maximum power
consumption) are 65W and 95W. The Core 2 Duo also has more power
saving features to further reduce power consumption when not at max
power.
>be. The Core 2 is $130 more then the Pentium D. I'm thinking I might
>just save the money and go with the Pentium D.
The difference should really be more like $80 unless you're either
getting a really good deal on the Pentium D 820 or you're getting
ripped off on the Core 2 Duo. Prices from
www.newegg are $181 for the
Core 2 Duo 6300 vs. $99 for the Pentium D 820, all of a $82 price
difference.
Honestly I really can't think of any reason to recommend a Pentium D
processor to anyone at this stage in the game. Unless you're trying
to build a dual-core system on a shoe-string budget where performance
is not a big concern (in which case why would you want dual-core?),
then the extra $82 for the Core 2 Duo chip is WAY worth it.
--
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
