Need help understanding the world of processors

PC Hobbyist

PC Hobbyist

New Member
I'm looking into buying a new laptop and I don't quite know what processor to go with and which ones to stay away from. Ever since we entered the world of Core2Duo I stopped keeping up with the world of processors. I'm not a gamer, but I wouldn't mind paying a bit more (no pun intended) for processing power.

Here are some questions that I think about when I go to bed at night...

1. AMD vs. Intel?
2. 32-bit vs. 64-bit? (I actually started a separate thread on this)
3. Athlon, Turion, Celeron, Pentium, Core2Duo, Centrino - which ones are better, and which ones are comparable between AMD and Intel? :confused:
4. What is the difference between: Centrino, Centrino 2, Centrino Duo, Core2Duo, CentrinoCore2Duo? :eek:
5. Is a Core2Duo at 1.5GHz the same as for example a Pentium 4 at 3GHz?

Your input on these will help me sleep better at night. :)
 
Last edited:
1. I simply prefer intel
2. New intel processors (like late P4 and Core/Core 2) have EM64T included which is the feature needed for 64-bit support
3. Pentium are the old ones, Core are the new ones. Core 2 Duo has a multi-core processor (2 cores). There is also Core2Quad which has 4 cores.
4. really don't know
5. You are like asking "Is a 2 core processor same as single core processor?". Obvious, two cores are better than one. The GHz means how many bits (ones and zeros) it can process per second (1.5 GHz = 1.5 billion bits).

At intel, each new processor released has the little transistors it is made of smaller, and that means that more transistors can fit in the same space and the processors are becoming faster and faster.
 
chibicitiberiu said:
5. You are like asking "Is a 2 core processor same as single core processor?". Obvious, two cores are better than one. The GHz means how many bits (ones and zeros) it can process per second (1.5 GHz = 1.5 billion bits).
Click to expand...

So in terms of how fast they are, you can't just multiply the Core2Duo speed by two to compare to the speed of a Pentium (like in my example)?
 
PC Hobbyist said:
So in terms of how fast they are, you can't just multiply the Core2Duo speed by two to compare to the speed of a Pentium (like in my example)?
Click to expand...

I can't tell you too much about Core processors since i still use an old intel p4 with 3ghz. But i think it IS at least twice faster.
 
chibicitiberiu said:
I can't tell you too much about Core processors since i still use an old intel p4 with 3ghz. But i think it IS at least twice faster.
Click to expand...

The more core the more threads it can handle.

It does dot mean it is twice as fast. eg 2GHz C2D is not = to 4GHz P4

A core two due is "like" two pentium 4 (cores) 2GHz on one die operating at the same speed. It still runs at 2GHz but has twice the processing power...

Get a Core 2 Duo. It is the processor that has really killed AMD.
 
Computer_Freak said:
The more core the more threads it can handle.

It does dot mean it is twice as fast. eg 2GHz C2D is not = to 4GHz P4

A core two due is "like" two pentium 4 (cores) 2GHz on one die operating at the same speed. It still runs at 2GHz but has twice the processing power...

Get a Core 2 Duo. It is the processor that has really killed AMD.
Click to expand...

okay - I think I'm slowing getting. Just to clarify it for me, could you tell me what is wrong with the following statements?

  1. A Core2Duo 2GHz = two cores each working at 2GHz to equal what a 4GHz P4 can do.
  2. And - in that same Core2Duo 2GHz vs. P4 4GHz example, you say C2D is operating with "more power". Does that mean it will accomplish tasks faster than the P4?

What about Centrino and Centrino2? Is that a technology that makes the Core2Duo even faster? What type of tasks is it useful for?
 
PC Hobbyist said:
okay - I think I'm slowing getting. Just to clarify it for me, could you tell me what is wrong with the following statements?

  1. A Core2Duo 2GHz = two cores each working at 2GHz to equal what a 4GHz P4 can do.
  2. And - in that same Core2Duo 2GHz vs. P4 4GHz example, you say C2D is operating with "more power". Does that mean it will accomplish tasks faster than the P4?

What about Centrino and Centrino2? Is that a technology that makes the Core2Duo even faster? What type of tasks is it useful for?
Click to expand...

Core 2 Duo is the best for multitasking caus eit can handle more threads...

It accomplishes tasks quicker and it uses less power.

As far as a 2GHz C2D being = to a 4GHz P4, i think it could be true.

What I was trying to clear up was that It is not 2 x 2GHz. It is just 2 cores at 2GHz.
 
Thanks for clarifying. It's just confusing because often times when you look at new computers, they will say for example Core2Duo 2GHz and then in parenthesis (2 x 2GHz). So it made me think that each core worked at 2 GHz, making it the same as a single core at 4 GHz. But if I understood you correctly they both total up to 2GHz, but the computing power is just as good or better than a single core at 4GHz.
 
1. AMD vs. Intel?
2. 32-bit vs. 64-bit? (I actually started a separate thread on this)
3. Athlon, Turion, Celeron, Pentium, Core2Duo, Centrino - which ones are better, and which ones are comparable between AMD and Intel?
4. What is the difference between: Centrino, Centrino 2, Centrino Duo, Core2Duo, CentrinoCore2Duo?
5. Is a Core2Duo at 1.5GHz the same as for example a Pentium 4 at 3GHz?
Click to expand...

1. Intel at the moment
2. The core2 (but not the Core Duo or Pentium M) and (nearly all?) current AMD cpus support both 32 and 64 bit mode
3/4 Centrino isnt actually a CPU. Its a marketing term for intel cpu + intel wifi + graphics. Core2 is the best at the minute.
5. No. Apps, particuarly older ones, that dont use threading may even be slower, but for multitasking and doing certain things like video conversion , its much faster.

think about it in terms of a factory with converyor belts. One assembley line is faster, but the other has two conveyor belts, so they move the same stuff, but the second one is better if you want to produce two different cars at once

also you cant even compare clock speeds. Core was a redesign for efficiency (notice how in the past Athlons used to be better than pentiums, even although they were like 1ghz less?). A single core Core Solo of a lower clock speed could outperform it a pentium 4
 
Multi-Core CPUs
I'm gonna use my example, I have a Q6600.
My Q6600 has 4 cores all clocked at 3Ghz (overclocked)
each individual core is at 3Ghz
since all cores on a single chip use the same multiplier and FSB, it is not possible (or practical) to variate the clock speed of each core. Technically the do add up to 12Ghz but it by no means is that fast. A Q6600 is basically two E6600s glued together, it is not a true quad core CPU in that its L2 cache is not shared between all CPUs but thats not what I'm trying to explain.
Back to explanation...
Software MUST make use of the multiple cpus for the multiple cpus to have any effect in performance. If you take a program that only uses one thread, even on a computer with 4 CPUs, it will only make use of one of them (or thanks to Windows load balancing %25 of each core.) Often a program can ONLY be single threaded, programs are basically sequences or algorithms that are chained together. If the program couldn't possibly be broken in smaller pieces, it cant be multi-threaded. For example, if you compare a single programming thread to baking a cake, obviously you can't break the steps of baking a cake into smaller pieces. You wouldn't mix the ingredients while baking it at the same time, you have to mix and then bake. Of course many things CAN be multi-threaded, a game for instance can have a thread for AI, and thread for graphics, one for audio processing, and another for physics.

A lot of times doing fewer things faster is better than doing many things slower likes games. If a game only has two threads, graphics and audio for instance then a dual-core at 3.4Ghz would do better than my Quad at 3Ghz.

Now even if your program were able to make use of all 4 cores, it still only processes at the speed of the processor, 3Ghz in my case, it just breaks the process into smaller pieces so it is more efficient.

Core 2 Duos and Pentium 4s

The Core line of CPUs are enormously better than the Pentium line, the Core 2's were completely redesigned in how they work. The Pentiums were inefficient beasts that got extremely hot and still didn't perform well. This is why AMD used to rule the roost even though their CPUs were slower in Ghz, their memory efficiency was unmatched thanks to the integrated memory controller (Intel uses the North Bridge for memory communication.) Now AMDs were better at memory-intense apps like games while the Pentium 4s were pretty good general CPUs. When Intel released the Core CPUs it pretty much raped AMD in every level, there was nothing that the Core 2 Duo was bad at. The redesign made the CPUs more efficient with memory as well as making them run at lower voltages and, as a result, lower temperatures. A Pentium 4 Dual core at 3Ghz would be put to shame by a Core 2 Duo at 2.4Ghz because it used much more efficient processes. These Core 2 Duos actually were derived from the old Pentium M for laptops. The Pentium Ms were designed to run at lower speeds and lower temperatures and when released it was realized that they had great potential as powered up Desktops CPUs because even the Pentium Ms could beat many Athlon desktop 64 CPUs at the time. AMD has yet to release a CPU to best it's Intel counterpart in the High-End consumer-level CPU market.

Centrino is not an actual CPU
Centrino is a nickname for their mobile CPUs, anything can be a centrino if its in a laptop. There are Celeron, Pentium, Core, and Core2s under the Centrino name, don't even look at that name, look for the actual processor in it.

32 bit vs 64 bit

As of now its not a big deal with Windows because there isn't much now that makes use of 64bits unless you just want uber amounts of RAM because 32bit CPUs are limited to roughly 4GB of RAM while 64bit CPUs have an almost infinite ceiling.

Laptops
When looking for a laptop you need to try to find one with the best CPU since that's the one part that usually isn't upgradeable.

My Recommendation:
Intel: good ones lie in the T55##s and up at decent prices. T7### are even better but come at a cost (usually in laptops in the $1000+ range)

AMD: their budget CPUs are the TL series, they aren't all that great. My laptop has an RM-70, I would recommend getting a lappy with ZM-80s and up for AMD.
 
Last edited:
jdbennet said:
......think about it in terms of a factory with converyor belts......
also you cant even compare clock speeds. Core was a redesign for efficiency (notice how in the past Athlons used to be better than pentiums, even although they were like 1ghz less?). A single core Core Solo of a lower clock speed could outperform it a pentium 4
Click to expand...

@jdbennet: Thanks for the info and the great example! I'm a visual learner - so the conveyor belt example helps clarify it a lot! More and more, I'm understanding things better - finally! ;)


please explain the pun you think i should have understood........ i'm not seeing it
Click to expand...
@Kal2509: The pun I meant in "I wouldn't mind paying a bit more for processing power" is in the word "bit" (as in a computer bit - since we're talking about processing bits of information --- OR --- meaning "paying a bit more - in other words a "small amount" of money in this case. Okay, so when you explain a pun it sounds dumb, but hey - I never claimed it to be funny. :)


Long explanation from gramerman4
Click to expand...
@gamerman4: WOW - awesome explanation - thanks for your time! That really helped a lot. I have been leaning toward an hp laptop with a T7100. Silly me - I thought the T7100 referred to some hp label system. :o Now I see it is the cpu. From what you wrote, it seems like my gut feeling was somewhat leading me in the right direction. I'll start looking at other T7*** and see what I can find.

Thanks again to everyone. Any other inputs are always welcome!

EDIT: I was just looking at this Wikipedia page about Core2Duo processors. The T9500 seems nice! Of course a bit pricey - but I'm not ruling it out.
 
Last edited:
a core 2 duo at 2 ghz would be slower than a 4 ghz single core for 2 reasons

1. the processor does calculations half as fast due to half the speed
2. there is an additional calculation done by the processor to move the task to one core or the other

manufacturers stopped making single core and moved to dual core because if you have a 2 ghz quad core, it will produce as much heat as any other 2 ghz processor. however an 8 ghz processor would produce a rediculous amount of heat and would be impossible to cool
 
PC Hobbyist said:
I'm looking into buying a new laptop and I don't quite know what processor to go with and which ones to stay away from. Ever since we entered the world of Core2Duo I stopped keeping up with the world of processors. I'm not a gamer, but I wouldn't mind paying a bit more (no pun intended) for processing power.

Here are some questions that I think about when I go to bed at night...

1. AMD vs. Intel?
2. 32-bit vs. 64-bit? (I actually started a separate thread on this)
3. Athlon, Turion, Celeron, Pentium, Core2Duo, Centrino - which ones are better, and which ones are comparable between AMD and Intel? :confused:
4. What is the difference between: Centrino, Centrino 2, Centrino Duo, Core2Duo, CentrinoCore2Duo? :eek:
5. Is a Core2Duo at 1.5GHz the same as for example a Pentium 4 at 3GHz?

Your input on these will help me sleep better at night. :)
Click to expand...

1) intel
2) 32-bit OS for now so you can have full driver support, but most good processors support 64-bit
3) they're all names for actual cpus, to understand this you have to seperate each cpu name into their respective manufacturer and compare the cpus to each other. make a list of all the intels and all the AMDs and then do some research on it. google is your friend.
5. a netburst processor must perform at 90% faster than it's Core successor in order to perform at the same speed. basically, if you have a Core processor take it's speed and multiply it by 1.9 to get the speed that a netburst cpu would have to be clocked at to give the same performance. for example: my 4.0ghz E8400.... if you wanted a single core P4 to perform at the same speed in a single threaded application it would have to be (4000mhzx1.9 = 7600mhz) clocked at 7.6ghz. all cpus scale differently so you have to perform benchmarks in order to figure out what is equal to what.
 
viper110110 said:
a core 2 duo at 2 ghz would be slower than a 4 ghz single core for 2 reasons

1. the processor does calculations half as fast due to half the speed
2. there is an additional calculation done by the processor to move the task to one core or the other
Click to expand...
it depends on the how many calculations can be done per clock cycle with the architecture of the CPU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top