backtop


Print 58 comment(s) - last by qwertzuiop.. on Nov 4 at 10:38 PM

Core 2 Duo, the sequel

Intel’s latest roadmap outlines plans for Conroe’s 2007 refresh. The upcoming refresh of Intel’s Core 2 Duo processor will arrive at the same time as the upcoming Bearlake 3 series of chipsets. This will be the first time Intel has refreshed its recently released Conroe architecture. The refresh is quite minor this time around. Nevertheless the Conroe refresh raises the front-side bus up to 1333 MHz and adds Intel Trusted Execution Technology.

Intel Conroe Refresh
Processor
Number
Core
Frequency
Bus
Frequency
L2
Cache
E6850 3 GHz
1333 MHz 4MB
E6800 2.93 GHz 1066 MHz 4MB
E6750 2.66 GHz 1333 MHz 4MB
E6650 2.33 GHz 1333 MHz 4MB

Three refreshed models will debut with the upcoming Bearlake 3 series chipsets. These models include the Core 2 Duo E6850, E6750 and E6650 clocked at 3 GHz, 2.66 GHz and 2.33 MHz respectively. At this point in time it doesn’t appear Intel has any plans for its Core 2 Extreme lineup, in terms of dual-core processors that is. Kentsfield Core 2 Extreme QX6700 will remain as Intel’s flag-ship enthusiast product.

In addition to the refreshed Conroe Core 2 Duo lineup, Intel will release one more 1066 MHz front-side bus endowed Core 2 Duo product. The upcoming Core 2 Duo E6800 will arrive clocked at 2.93 GHz—similar to Intel’s Core 2 Extreme X6800. The processor is expected to be Intel’s flagship processor for mainstream segments. Aside from the locked multiplier, the Core 2 Duo E6800 is identical to the Core 2 Extreme X6800.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By Pirks on 10/17/2006 8:59:12 PM , Rating: -1
that definitely puts me on defensive... lemme think - how do I guarantee that my system is stable? say, I've got cheap c2d and oced it up to your 3.6 on air/stock/cheap everything - and then say some time later I get a blue screen playing some Prey level. here's your million dollar question - how can you possibly get insight into the cause of the bsod and prove that your overclock was or was not the reason for it? see, this thing adds a whole huge new variable into equation - now how do I figure out this variable, how do I analyze system behavior with it?

there should be some specific oc tect developed, something that puts a strain on the whole system - loads cpu and gpu cores with lots of random complex calculations and shaders, tests the memory hard-style the way memtest86+ does it, while trashing hdd in the process and stuff like that. only after running this system burn test for several days in a closed case with fans on a middle speed you can guarantee your system is reasonably stable.

BUT! the deal is that this kind of test does not exist! and I don't wanna get bsod at some very interesting moment in my life - be it Prey or some work project. I just hate that.

this also pays a role why I stay with AMD - because I don't overclock due to possible stability issues and the absence of systematic stability test software.

and when you do NOT overclock - then all the intel hype turns out to be just that - a _hype_


By ScythedBlade on 10/17/2006 9:31:16 PM , Rating: 1
24 hours orthos

wait, how about i just put an end:

refer to xtremeforums.org

gg


By Etern205 on 10/18/2006 10:17:30 AM , Rating: 2
The reason why your rig fails from overclocking is because you do not know how to overclock correctly. Overclocking a rig does not mean you just over clock a cpu and that's it. There are other things to consider as well such as ram and FSB. Also stock cooler are no use once you OC a cpu, you need better 3rd party cooler or some might go for water cooling.



By ScythedBlade on 10/18/2006 6:44:06 PM , Rating: 3
The stock cooler that Intel gives you is enough. My temps never reach throttle point (76C or so), so thats how. I also got 2 Gbs of Patriot ram for 120 dollars ... but now at newegg, they upped the price to 250. Damn em .... making THAT much more profit .... wholesale price was probably very cheap.


By Unknown255 on 10/18/2006 6:30:18 PM , Rating: 2
Technically, the value ram tested on Anandtech have been reaching high clocks, but the DDR ram when you bought it might have not been so good. Therefore, it's most likely the ram's fault. Then again, you might have a bad CPU from a batch ... and you can always divide it less for a better CPU overclock. From what I can see from forum browsing, however, is that many more people are getting over 1Ghz overclocks on Core 2 Duo, even on value ram (most likely because of the increased latency on the 965 chipset helps also) than 400 Mhz overclocks on AMD processors (referring to older Athlons anyway).

{BTW, I found this great deal a long time ago on froogle.com. You can get a kick-ass Arctic Freezer Pro 64 or 7 at http://www.provantage.com. At 17 dollars and possibly better than the Zalman 9500 at cooling, I would consider it cheap.}


By qwertzuiop on 11/4/2006 10:38:37 PM , Rating: 2
You can also clock down the RAM to lower dividers than 1:1 (I think the least ist 2:3 on the Boards that use dividers) w/o loosing as much performance as you lost on the nForce 2 based socket A systems.


"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein

Related Articles
Intel "Bearlake" Plans Unveiled
October 17, 2006, 1:24 PM
Intel "Kentsfield" Performance Explored
September 25, 2006, 6:35 PM
Here Comes "Conroe"
July 13, 2006, 12:47 PM













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki