Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Core 2 Duo Notebooks Reviewed

Posted by CmdrTaco on Mon Aug 28, 2006 08:55 AM
from the and-it-fits-in-the-something-of-your-something dept.
Portables Hardware
An anonymous reader writes "With the launch of Intel's Core 2 Duo chip today, I found this article that not only covers the new chip itself, but also reviews and benchmarks two retail notebooks. It's interesting since one machine has the entry level 1.66GHz CPU while the other has the top end 2.33GHz chip."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Core 2 Duo Notebooks Reviewed 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Bottom line? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gelfling (6534) on Monday August 28 2006, @09:00AM (#15993519) Homepage Journal
    So it's a glorified gamer machine? How fast can it start and run Lotus Notes or Thunderbird? How fast can it run a complete AV scan? How well and how fast does it run end to end, real world applications and not just RAM resident games? These benchmarks suck and pretty much ignore the fact that it's a notebook machine at all. And battery life appears to suck hard.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by PhoenixOne (674466)

      My view is very limited (I work in the game industry), but do people really buy the latest and greatest hardware just so they can run Thunderbird faster?

      I know there are plenty of non-game apps out there that require some serious CPU clocks, but if you need 2+ GHz to view your mail something has gone very wrong...

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by LWATCDR (28044)
        Well CAD users and yes a lot of people use CAD on notebooks.
        Photoshop users need a lot of CPU power as well.
        I for the life of me don't know why people pay two grand to play a $60 game.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Moofie (22272)
          Wow...it's almost like you have a different set of values and predilections from other people! What a stunning revelation. Where ever will it stop?
          • Yes I do find it odd. There are so many games that are fun and will run on an $800 machine just fine these days. The very idea of an Athlon FX, with SLI or ATI Crossfire video boards does strike me as a huge waste of money. The funny thing is that most gaming sites agree with me.
              • Oh I am never surprised. Just commenting on the obvious silliness of it. Right up with magnetic wrist bands for air sickness, the pink razor cell phone, and the Sony PS-3.
                I do wonder if you can use Nvidia Quadro cards in SLI mode. I mean does anyone that needs super high graphics performance use SLI?
                And yes I feel that there is a difference between the words needs, and wants.
                Unless you write video games for a living, review them, or compete professionally anything involving a video game is in the want categ
                  • If you wish. I only charge $5000 a year but I will include.
                    A cool red case for your computer that will speed it up at least 20%.
                    A really cool wing for your Honda that will give you at least 50 more HP.
                    And just for you some magnetic wrist bands that will prevent air sickness.
        • To be fair, it's $2000 to play several $60 games, and then run a free IM client to talk about how cool it all is.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Rytr23 (704409)
      Well, I am not defending them too much but they did perform more than gaming benchmarks..ie large file encryption, photoshop rendering etc etc.. so i am not sure what you're saying... as for ignoring that it is a notebook, well, it would seem to me that if I were looking for a "notebook" as opposed to a "desktop replacement" I wouldn't be looking at a 17" laptop that weighs 10 pounds.. maybe something a little more portable and less exhausting to tote around. And OF COURSE BATTERY LIFE IS GOING TO SUCK!!
    • This article tells absolutely nothing useful about the Core 2 platform, but it may have useful bits in it for those who are buzzword hungry. As our sister site reports, the first chip is better than the other chip. Let's have a look at a list comparing features of Chip A and Chip 2.
      • first chip - better than some other chips, unless you wait until spring
      • chip II - chip C is better than this in all respects, except that a certain chip which may or may not be the second chip or chip 3 is more modern and consumes less heat and is faster
      • third chip - designed in a foreign country and better than chip 2 but slower than the second chip
      • another chip - better than a chip which is to say not really better, but overwhelmingly not quite as power hungry as chip 1
      • a different chip - this is the be-all and end-all of chips off the ol' block, the mother load of chipdom, but not very impressive otherwise as that other chip
      Having trouble following me? Oh, gosh! I'm so sorry! As you can see, I'm having some difficulty stringing nouns and verbs together in order which conveys useful meaning. This article is a wedgie bunchy terdhammer pukebucket of crap. This article is a hopeless string of buzz words in a mash-up, probably ripped from an ars technica article or two and cranked back and forth through the Google translator to obscure the source . Don't waste your time reading it.

      I hope and desire that reading this really-not-fine-in-any-way article has not permanently affected my linguistic processing ability, although it may be so effected... doh! affected.

      Doesn't anybody *screen* these submissions?
      • That guy ignore! Real review of article here is:

        -

        This article the usefulness does not inform no matter what at all concerning the platform center 2, perhaps it possesses that useful bit for those which is hungry special language that. Because us the report of the place of the sisters, is better than the first fragment other fragment. It probably will have glance with the list which compares the feature of fragment a and fragment 2.
        • First when the fragment - it does not wait to the spring, improve than the fragment which has other things
        • Chip II - chip C this compared to compared to recovers with all directions, being instead of second chip or chip 3 intelligence the map which will not be the specific chip which it does not know today and compared to the enemy consumes ten and it is quicker
        • It becomes design from the foreign nation and 3rd the chip - and second the chip than folds and it cuts smaller 2 to improve it sees but it is slower
        • The different chip - with chip 1 by hungry force compared to it recovers with realness and it talks and the chip which is for compared to improves but overwhelmingly positively
        • The different chip - this when it is not like that, all, the different chip with the fact that it is impressed quite together but chipdom mother burden ol block falling chips end all, and so

        There is a trouble which follows me? Oh, Oh! Me quite sensibility be! The possibility you seeing the broad way which is, me the order broad way what kind of to be young bud which conveys meaning which is useful ties the personage and freezing to death together and. This article wedgie of the trash is terdhammer pukebucket where it is convex. This article is to chain every hour comfort which is not hope of popular saying, Iri it is torn like that and probably ars technica articles or in order to do darkly from 2 origin Google interpretations which the crank attach it leads and. It it does not waste you timely reading to dry.

        I do not know and so brought about... as many as doh logs i hope and the fact that it reads the what kind of method article from under the precision which is not this realness is Yongwon and to my language processing ability and the thing effect do not go mad i want! where Effect it received.

        The troublesome army song submits *screen*?

        -

        Mod the tubes it will kick and power Insightful is this post!
        • Dang it! I was going to run it through the Google translator and back before I posted. :-)

          Thank you so much for taking care of this for me.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Tremor (APi) (678603)
      It sounds like you think those tasks are more CPU-intensive than gaming might be. Gaming is not just a RAM benchmarks; games hit the CPU harder than almost anything you can throw at a PC. As far as application load times and AV scans go, that's probably equal parts CPU, RAM, and HD speed (more HD speed on the AV scan). If you're benchmarking a CPU, you've got synthetic benchmarks, games, and PhotoShop, pretty much.
    • You can never make everyone happy with a benchmark/review. I'm sitting at a "mobile workstation" class laptop, it's actually only 8lb but it's got a 17" widescreen, nvidia quadro graphics, blah blah blah. It's got the highest end core duo (not core 2 duo) and it's pretty speedy. The primary use for a system like this is CAD and they've spent a lot of money having this hardware certified by various vendors. As such, the only part of this review that helps the normal market for a machine like this is the 3DMa

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Trifthen (40989)
      There's actually a much better review at Hot Hardware:

      http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx?articl eid=864&cid=10 [hothardware.com]

      According to them, there's rough parity on battery usage (within 10% by clock) yet the chip is anywhere from 15-50% faster than the Core Duo depending on what you're doing.

      This is seriously a massive step forward, and I for one plan on buying a laptop equipped with one of these.
      • That's exactly the point - give me a test that evaluates the real world end to end performance of a machine and load it up with all the spyware and AV scanners you'd need to keep it running. I really don't understand why for instance one of the dual-cores can't be dedicated to security, malware, spyware, phishing and so on.

  • Only "Merom" today .... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    We've had a Core 2 Duo ("Conroe") workstation here for a couple weeks now.

    Only the Core 2 Duo "Merom," [google.com] for notebooks, was released today.

  • The Verdict (Score:4, Informative)

    by neonprimetime (528653) on Monday August 28 2006, @09:04AM (#15993550)
    Instead of reading the entire article, here's the summary ...

    Verdict

    Both of these are impressive machines for anyone who wants to get hold of the power of Merom straight away. The lower clocked AJP does seem slightly lack-lustre compared to the top end Rock, especially as the 1,920 x 1,200 screen wasn't the best we've seen. If battery life is the primary concern you might do better with a Core Duo, due to its lower TDP, unless you can wait for ultra-low voltage Core 2 Duo laptops to appear.

    If you can spend the money the T7600 based Rock is outrageously fast for a notebook and it's well specced too. However, we think the mid-rage 2GHz, T7200 will end up being the Merom CPU of choice.
    • So in other words, just as with nearly every review of a new processor ever made that doesn't try to divide by 0... if you can afford the brand new bleeding-edge chip, you might like it better than the less-expensive version.

  • battery life (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Mike_ya (911105) on Monday August 28 2006, @09:10AM (#15993593) Homepage
    How does the battery life compare to the 'single core' Pentium M?
    Does battery life not matter in laptop reviews anymore?

    How is the lap heat, is it twice as hot? My current laptop gets limited lap time because of the heat.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Halo1 (136547)
      It's on the last page [trustedreviews.com] of the review. And it's very bad (a laptop that can't even run 2 hours on a battery charge?)

      • Re:battery life (Score:5, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 28 2006, @09:29AM (#15993686)

        It also says "Times in seconds (lower is better)"

      • It doesn't really say (without having to dig up "MobileMark 2005" specifics) what the conditions are.

        Just under 2 hours for both cores fully loaded at full clock speed is pretty good. I don't think any laptop made in the past 5-6 years could manage much more than 2 hours at full tilt.

        Just under 2 hours idling at low clock speed would be awful though.

        I know my Core Duo based Inspiron E1705 lasted about 2 hours per battery at medium load, full screen brightness (at one point I was doing power measurements, a

    • Re:battery life (Score:4, Informative)

      by TheRaven64 (641858) on Monday August 28 2006, @09:57AM (#15993832) Homepage Journal
      Tests I have seen show Core 2 laptops having about a 7% longer battery life than their Core 1 counterparts. Part of this is due to the fact that they run faster, and so they spend less time in high-drain mode and more time in power-saving mode.

      I know a couple of people with Core 1 MacBook Pros, and they seem to get slightly better battery life than I do with a G4 PowerBook, so I think the Core 2 is promising. Now if only Apple would hurry up and put them in portables, I would give them some money...

    • I've got the Acer 8204 (Dual core at 2Ghz) and a MacBook Pro (Dual core at 2Ghz) the Acer has legendary battery life when you put in power consumption mode. I've managed to get over six hours worth of work when on a plan having forgotten my adaptor, even with WiFi on I've managed to get well over 3.5 hours and upwards by turning the LCD brightness down. The MacBook isn't quite as impressive, its over 3.5 hours when using WiFi, but doesn't last above 5 when I'm trying to conserve power.

      My old Intel Celeron
    • I agree. That's why the marketing says "notebook". They are careful not to call them laptops because they know they are too hot for on-lap use.

      The TDP of the T series Core Duo and Core 2 Duo are something like 31 and 34W, respectively.

      If battery time, weight and heat are your concern, you will want the L series or U series Core Duo, which are rated for about 15W and 9W, respectively. They tend to be used in the ultralight notebooks. Going with the T series Core Solo won't help much because that's rated a
      • I agree. That's why the marketing says "notebook". They are careful not to call them laptops because they know they are too hot for on-lap use.

        You know, this really bugs me. A notebook has a strict definition; it is a laptop which is either A4 or US Letter sized. Now people are starting to describe laptops as 'sub-notebooks,' when they are noticeably bigger than any note book you are likely to encounter.

  • Don't forget the legal stuff (Score:5, Funny)

    by suv4x4 (956391) on Monday August 28 2006, @09:21AM (#15993649)
    Jesus, check their logo [trustedreviews.com].

    intel(r)
    core(tm)
    inside(tm)

    This requires talent. I just hope we don't run out of words we can use seeing how businesses trademark them one by one.

  • What no AMD ? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by denisbergeron (197036) <DenisBergeron.yahoo@com> on Monday August 28 2006, @09:40AM (#15993737)
    Since amd have a lot of CPU with dual core on the store now. I would like to see a comparative with Intel and AMD dual core 64 bits CPU.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Andy Dodd (701)
      "Since amd have a lot of CPU with dual core on the store now. I would like to see a comparative with Intel and AMD dual core 64 bits CPU."

      No they don't. The Turion 64 X2 was only released very recently, and to this day, good systems (read, NOT from HP or Compaq) with Turion 64s (let alone X2 variants) are hard to find. In fact, in March when I bought my new Core Duo-based Dell, it was simply not possible to find a Turion 64-based laptop with a 17" screen, reputable vendor or not.

      Remember, this article is
      • Sorry, but Acer, HP, Asus, Fujitsu and others big manufacturer made Turion X2 with 17" for more than 2 months. Period.
  • The Front Side Bus speeds is of particular interest as it's the same as the current Core Duo chips. The new chip also uses the same Socket M interface, which means that it's a drop in replacement for the old Core Duo, so you could, in theory upgrade an older notebook with the newer chip.


    Where's the instructions for upgrading the cheapest old Core Duo notebook to a Core2 Duo with these new chips?
  • Dell laptop advertised with core 2 duo [dell.com]

    Click through to specify the machine and only the T2600/T2700 for sale. These are Core Duos arent they?

    Wouldnt suprise me to see Dell guilty of misleading adverting (They got me on an "upgradable graphics card" before) but this looks prity blatant.

  • Infinite loop?? (Score:3, Funny)

    by bingo_cannon (779085) on Monday August 28 2006, @12:07PM (#15994756)
    How much time does it take to finish an infinite loop? Did they say that?

    • Re:Launched today? (Score:5, Informative)

      by ZachPruckowski (918562) <zachary.pruckowski@gmail.com> on Monday August 28 2006, @09:17AM (#15993626)
      Core 2 Duo desktop and laptop chips were formally announced in July (the 27th or so). Desktop chips (Conre) were launched then, and started shipping (with models coming out in serious numbers over the last two weeks). Notebook chips (Merom) were "launched" today, which means we can look at pretty benchmarks as Intel starts shipping them out to most OEMs. We will see the processors in computers at stores in a few weeks.

    • Re:Nomenclature (Score:5, Informative)

      by ThinkingInBinary (899485) <thinkinginbinary@@@gmail...com> on Monday August 28 2006, @09:20AM (#15993648) Homepage

      You are entirely wrong.

      So the Intel Core 2 Duo chip, also known as Merom was internally known as Conroe...

      No. Merom and Conroe are the notebook and desktop versions, respectively, of the same chip. Merom and Conroe are both the internal names of the chips. Officially, they're both called "Core 2 Duo", and the model numbers distinguish the two series. There are physical differences, including FSB speed and (IIRC) cache architecture.

      and is based on the Pentium M 'Banias' mobile chip based out of Haifa.

      No. Core Duo is based on the Pentium M Dothan, which was an improved (more cache and higher FSB) version of Banias.

      Additionally, the original Core Duo (Yonah) isn't really a Core product,

      True. Props to Intel for the dumb naming.

      it's just a P4M with two cores.

      No! It's a Pentium M with two cores! Big difference! The Pentium 4-M is a pathetic, hot, power-hogging, slow version of the Pentium 4. The Pentium M is based mostly on the Pentium III, and was designed from the ground up to be more efficient per watt.

      Core structure actually starts with Core 2 Duo, thus the Core 2 identification?

      Yes. structure = microarchitecture.

      While I agree, Intel's naming and branding sucks... try not to make it worse!

      • While I agree, Intel's naming and branding sucks... try not to make it worse!
        Eh, sorry. I was just taking what I said from the article. Is the article wrong or did I misread it?

        • I think you misread it. but that's easy to do. Decide for yourself:

          Website: So how does the mobile version of Core 2 Duo (Merom) actually differ from the desktop version (Conroe)? Actually, the differences are relatively minor - though as it's essentially the same chip that's not really surprising.

          You: So the Intel Core 2 Duo chip, also known as Merom was internally known as Conroe...

          Website: (well, the website doesn't explicitly say this, but Dothan came after Banias)

          You: and is based on the Penti

      • Re:Nomenclature (Score:4, Informative)

        by dfghjk (711126) on Monday August 28 2006, @10:03AM (#15993875)
        I find it interesting that people readily accept the notion that Pentium M is a derivative of the PIII while Core 2 is somehow distinct from Core or Pentium M. The Pentium M was developed years after the PIII, was specifically developed for portables, was created by an entirely different design team, used the bus of the P4 and had significant architectural differences when compared to PIII. The Core 2, meanwhile, is an immediate follow-on of Core, just as Core was a follow-on of Pentium M, is architecturally similar and even shares a pinout with Core in the case of Merom. To claim that Core 2 is the first "Core architecture" product is arbitrary and more absurd than claiming that Pentium M is a new version of PIII, yet that seems to be what's floated around here. Each processor is a new design effort that benefits from designs that came before it. Naming is simply marketing BS.
    • Is there any way to tell which of these intel chips are 64 bit?

      You know you've reached sublime advertising obfuscation when a cell phone plan seems simple in comparison.

      WTF, K.

      • Is there any way to tell which of these intel chips are 64 bit?

        Core Duo = 32 bit. Core 2 Duo = 64 bit.

          • Then why on Earth didn't they name them something sane and meaningful like Core Duo 32 and Core Duo 64?

            I suspect they did not name them as you suggest because consumers would be convinced that because 64 is twice as big as 32, it was twice as fast. Others would believe that the 32 bit was somehow an inferior, older platform and avoid it, even if it was the best chip for their needs. Thus, since to the average user the chips are not very different at all, they named them in a way to emphasize that. In fac

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by OfNoAccount (906368)
        As far as I can recall all Core2 CPUs are 64bit.

        The xnnnn E parts lack virtualization though, not to be confused with the Ennnn parts which are Allendale server chips with virtualization.

        OK, I can see why people are confused now ;)
    • the original Core Duo (Yonah) isn't really a Core product,


      It has only itself to blame really. If it had only listened to God in the first place it wouldn't have been swallowed whole by that other chip.
    • They try hard to be the first with a fully craptastic review, and to recoup the cost of espresso consumed in the 30 minutes it took to test the machines and write the review, they spread their 200 word "review" over ten ad-laden pages.

      You are exactly right -- the hardware review sites are notorious for this.

      I think it's the "scoop" mentality that drives such horrible reviews and site designs.

      • Wrong. (Score:2, Informative)

        by ZepFloyd (993131)
        first of all this has nothing to do with Conroe, this is about Merom. Of course I know you can buy conroe chips. Secondly you CAN update the processor in your laptop, all you need is a BIOS update (and a socketed set, not soddered as a few are). The first release with the 667FSB is designed to drop right into the 945GM chipset. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_2_Duo#Merom [wikipedia.org]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.