Core 2 Duo or AMD Turion 64 X2

[Tmosley]

Does anyone have any thoughts on which is better?

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Don't know...I just bought a Core 2 Duo. I saw that a lot of the Dell notebooks have a Turion now. Curious to find out.

[mknawabi]

Core 2 Duo without a doubt. They excel at floating point operations and are in some cases 30-50% faster.

They also use less power for increased battery life, and a 4MB L2 cache for increased process speed.

If you read any reviews, they will agree, the Core 2 Duo is superior without a doubt.

[timbernet]

I used to be a huge AMD fanboy (still am a wee bit) -- but with the Duo series most of that is out the window.

I think the Duo is Intel's best line of CPUs in years - and in terms of performance-per-dollar, they are killer!

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Core 2 Duo without a doubt. They excel at floating point operations and are in some cases 30-50% faster.

They also use less power for increased battery life, and a 4MB L2 cache for increased process speed.

If you read any reviews, they will agree, the Core 2 Duo is superior without a doubt.

Only for processors 2GHz or faster. Slower, and it's still 2mb.

[Col_M]

At the moment the Core 2 Duos are the chip of choice. They not only have good performance out of the box but readilly overclock by a good amount.
I'm currently running my E6300 @ 2.8Ghz (a 1Ghz overclock) using stock volts and that is by no means impressive as they will usually go to 3.4Ghz+

[deadpass]

Only for processors 2GHz or faster. Slower, and it's still 2mb.


No true Ron, the e6320 and e6420 are 4mb cache. The e6300 and e6400 are allendale cores with 2mb cache, but those are the old revisions.

Oh and, C2D all the way.

Col_M, that's a pretty decent OC, what motherboard are you using? my wife's rig has a e6300 @3.2

[mknawabi]

You have to make sure youre getting Core 2 Duo, not Core Duo. I'm pretty sure all the Core 2 Duo mobile chips are Meroms, which have 4 MB of L2 Cache.

[12345Michael54321]

I have nothing against AMD; I currently own two computers (one notebook, one desktop) with AMD processors, and I don't regret having purchased them. But if I were buying a new computer today, I'd buy Core 2 Duo.

Of course, in the near future AMD may well come out with a Core 2 Duo killer CPU. And a few months after that, Intel will come up with some enhanced quad core CPU that'll make AMD's offering look pathetic. And so on. That's how these things tend to work.

Either way, don't skimp on the RAM. Putting too little RAM in your fast computer, is like putting bald tires on your Ferrari.

[tim]

Core2 is the best at the moment AFAIK. I have AMD in my machine but if I were buying now i'd get Core2 duo.

[ghms421]

My sister has a Turion 64 on her laptop, and personally I don't like it for most applications beyond general use (internet,itunes etc.) I've been using a pentium 4 for the past five years, but come tuesday (according to fedex) I'll have my 2ghz core duo 2 iMac with 2gb ram.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Either way, don't skimp on the RAM. Putting too little RAM in your fast computer, is like putting bald tires on your Ferrari.

Speaking of RAM, what's a good brand of RAM to buy for a laptop? I ordered my notebook with just one gig, in hopes of finding another gig stick for less than the $250 or more Dell was asking.

[12345Michael54321]

Crucial, Kingston, Samsung? Probably a few others. You know, the big names. As opposed to "Lovely Fortunate Flower Memory Chip Computering Company" RAM, purchased from a guy selling out of the trunk of his Hyundai, in the McDonald's parking lot across the road from the computer show.

Even though the guy swore to you that most of Kingston's RAM is actually manufactured by Lovely Fortunate Flower, and the only reason why the RAM is sold loose in a brown paper bag is because the government taxes it at a higher rate if it's in plastic packaging.

[deadpass]

It doesn't really matter ronald, just get some name brand stuff that is the speed your lappy needs. Mushkin, Super Talent, G. Skill, Transcend, Geil, Corsair, Crucial, Kingston. All good for lappies since you don't have to worry about overclocking headroom. Just make sure you get pc2-4300 (ddr2-533) or faster if you're running a computer with a fsb of 1066.

oh and not all meroms have 4mb of cache. I have a t5600 and it only has 2mb.

[Citizensmith]

Core2Duo (6000 series at least) are in general the better processor, but the X2s are cheaper. If you look at benchmarks for a given cost though its pretty even. If you want to spend $180 on your CPU (for instance) it really makes little difference which you get, the X2 5600 and the C2D 6400 are pretty much the same performance wise.

[Tsmith]

I've just in the past few days been setting up a new Intel E6700 system on an MSI P6N SLI Platinum mobo with 2 gigs of Corsair XMS 6400C4 RAM and this thing is sick fast. Blows my previous P4 3.0GHz HT out of the water. I've been running it stable with a 25% overclock (2.66GHz > 3.33Ghz) for about 36 hours now on stock Intel CPU Cooling. Temps under load haven't gone above 50 degrees Celius that I've seen.

Photoshop CS3 loads from a cold start in under 5 seconds to the desktop. It was taking 28 seconds with my previous setup, even with a freshly formated install of XP.

[Col_M]

Col_M, that's a pretty decent OC, what motherboard are you using? my wife's rig has a e6300 @3.2
Hi deadpass, i've got a Gigabyte DS3.
I suppose i could try to get higher but i'm happy with the 2.8 as i don't need any more, it gives me some stability as i'm not pusing it hard, my memory is also running at it's rated speed (FSB 400Mhz).

[bestfromnw]

core 2 is faster also its more power efficient aka better battery charge

[aussieskier]

I used to be a huge AMD fanboy (still am a wee bit) -- but with the Duo series most of that is out the window.

I think the Duo is Intel's best line of CPUs in years - and in terms of performance-per-dollar, they are killer!

I'll second that entire statement :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

I was such an anti Intel guy that I did not belive the upcoming Dual cores would surpass the AMD Opterons back in the Summer of 2006,.
So I spec'ed my Machine to run Dual Opterons..

Seems a nice Intel Dual or Quad core at 1/4 the price I paid would do the job of this system now..

It's all intel right now.

[Citizensmith]

I was such an anti Intel guy that I did not belive the upcoming Dual cores would surpass the AMD Opterons back in the Summer of 2006,.
So I spec'ed my Machine to run Dual Opterons..

Seems a nice Intel Dual or Quad core at 1/4 the price I paid would do the job of this system now..

It's all intel right now.

Are you really comparing processors bought in Summer 06 to the current batch? The fact that what you sunk your hard earned dollar into 9 months ago sucks now is just part of computing. It would be the same if you'd got Pentium Ds, or Core Duos and were now looking at all the Core 2s. :)

And I agree, intel have the performance crown right now, but if you are looking for a mid to low range processor there really is no difference between an Intel and an equivalent priced AMD.