After years of wandering in the wilderness, Intel has recaptured the desktop CPU performance title in dramatic fashion. Both the Core 2 Extreme X6800 and the Core 2 Duo E6700 easily outperform the Athlon 64 FX-62 across a range of applicationsand the E6600 is right in the hunt, as well. Not only that, but the Core 2 processors showed no real weaknesses in our performance tests. (I would say that Core looks like a more balanced architecture than Netburst, but at this stage of the game, Netburst just seems slow almost across the board.) No matter what you're hoping to do with your PC, a Core 2 processor should be a very solid choice.
The PC industry can also breathe a collective sigh of relief about power and thermal issues now that Core 2 has arrived. Intel finally has a firm handle on those problems. These processors consume less powerand thus produce less heatthan desktop Pentiums have for quite a while. The E6700 system's total power draw when fully loaded was 156 W, only 14W more than the Pentium Extreme Edition system drew while sitting idle. What's more, even the high-end Core 2 processors' power use was in line with that of the Energy Efficient versions of the Athlon 64 X2. That leaves room for many good things to happen, from less expensive cooling systems to quieter, smaller enclosures and even some righteous overclocking. Combine the low power draw with the performance we've seen, and the Core 2 is clearly the most energy-efficient desktop processor around.
As much as I appreciate the performance and efficiency of these new CPUs, though, I can't endorse forking out a cool grand (minus one) for a Core 2 Extreme X6800. These top-end CPUs are always iffy values, even if they're insane performers. Meanwhile, the prices on the first two Core 2 Duos are very reasonable for what you get. At $316, the Core 2 Duo E6600 looks like a tremendous deal, provided you can get your hands on one. The E6700 is pricier at $530, but it'll beat the much more expensive FX-62 at almost every turn.
In fact, after seeing the Core 2 in action, many folks may be wondering how AMD is going to keep up. The Athlon 64 X2 4200+ currently lists for more than the Core 2 Duo E6600, and that's just not gonna cut it. Fortunately, AMD has confirmed to us that a major price move is coming in July. We don't have the specifics just yet, but they say they intend to maintain a competitive price-performance ratio. That may mean we'll see the dramatic price cuts rumored to be coming, which would be a good start.
For its next trick, AMD needs to get its 65nm fab process going ASAP. I've heard prognostications that AMD won't be able compete against Core 2 chips with its current AMD64 microarchitecture. That may be the case, but I'm not entirely convinced. The contest we've seen in the preceding pages pitted CPUs manufactured on AMD's 90nm process against CPUs made on Intel's 65nm process. The Netburst fiasco at 90nm has made us forgetful about the benefits of process shrinks, but they can be substantial. AMD could be in a much stronger position if it gets to 65nm quickly.
Regardless of what happens with its competition, though, the big story here is that Intel has replaced its troubled Netburst microarchitecture with a world-beater. The Core microarchitecture and the chips based on it are a huge improvement, and a fitting end to the era of the Pentium.
-
351 comments —
Last by Z-Gradt at 2:52 AM on 07/21/06 - Email the author(s): Scott Wasson
- Sign up to receive notices when we publish new articles
- Or go back to TR's front page
-
AMD aims for low-power computing with Bobcat
The Bobcat core could mean big things for cheap, low-power computing. We've taken a quick look at its prospects and architecture. Read more...
54 comments —
Last by moritzgedig at 11:45 AM on 09/08/10 -
AMD's Bulldozer architecture revealed
Today, AMD revealed many specifics about its next-gen Bulldozer microarchitecture, which introduces some radical new concepts in CPU organization. Read more...
127 comments —
Last by RtFusion at 10:49 PM on 09/01/10 -
Intel's Xeon 5600 processors
These Xeons promise two more cores at the same clock speed and TDP. How good are they? We collected a host of systems in Damage Labs to find out. Read more...
38 comments —
Last by iq100 at 5:48 PM on 08/28/10 -
Opteron 4100 series aims for the clouds
After telegraphing its intentions for quite some time, AMD followed through today with the official unveiling of the Opteron 4100 series of processors. Read more...
48 comments —
Last by poulpy at 5:06 PM on 07/05/10 -
Intel's Core i7-875K and i5-655K processors
Intel has unlocked a pair of affordable CPUs, making overclocking dead simple. Join us as we welcome the K series to the 4GHz+ club. Read more...
129 comments —
Last by 1love4all at 6:13 PM on 09/07/10 -
Inside Intel's Atom Z600 series
The new Atom platform, code-named Moorestown, brings a PC-compatible system into a pocket-sized package with dramatically reduced power consumption. Read more...
107 comments —
Last by Meadows at 2:06 PM on 05/10/10 -
AMD's Phenom II X6 processors
At last, AMD has added turbocharging to its suite of CPU technologies, giving us a six-cylinder processor that's bulging with potential for questionable car analogies. Fortunately, the Phenom II X6 stands on its merits as a worthy challenger to some of Intel's best CPUs. Read more...
154 comments —
Last by anotherengineer at 1:01 PM on 05/25/10 -
Intel's Core i7-980X Extreme processor
Intel's dominance with the Nehalem Core i7s has been nearly complete, yet a replacement will soon arrive in the form of Gulftown, a six-core monster with 12MB of cache. How good is it? Should it replace your Pentium 4? Your Core 2 Quad Q6600? We investigate. Read more...
206 comments —
Last by indeego at 11:12 AM on 05/29/10
