Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor

Investing in new PCs with Intel® Core™2 processor family can mean big savings for your business. Delivering faster performance, greater energy efficiency, and more responsive multitasking, desktop PCs with Intel® Core™2 processor family can help your whole company be more productive.

By combining breakthrough processing speeds with advanced power saving features, desktop PCs with Intel® Core™2 processor family let you get more done in less time than ever before reducing energy costs by an average of 50 percent.¹ Processors built with Intel's unique 45nm technology offer excellent performance as well as unique energy-saving features that help PCs meet ENERGY STAR² requirements. That means reduced power consumption for desktop PCs and lower energy costs for your company.

The Intel Core 2 Duo Is Finally Out!

The long-awaited Intel® Core 2 Duo has finally arrived here in Malaysia. As you know by now, the Core 2 Duo brand will cover both the desktop and mobile processors. The Intel® Core 2 Duo desktop processor was codenamed Conroe, whereas Merom is the codename for the mobile processor.

The event kicked off with an introduction by Intel Malaysia's PR Manager, Norhizam Kadir. Then Intel's Marketing Manager, Charlotte Lamprecht took over the show, introducing the new processors and showing the advantages of the new Core architecture over the previous Netburst architecture.

Needless to say, lots of numbers were thrown out. Not surprising for a company in an industry obsessed with numbers. But it's evident that Intel wants us to quickly forget about the Gigahertz mindset they started us on, and start thinking in terms of performance per watt.

Intel also roped in Malaysia's 2005 World Cyber Games champion, Albert Lim, to speak at the launch. He was the first to own an Intel Core 2 Duo processor in Malaysia and needless to say, he loved it. Who wouldn't? The system, armed with a $999 Core 2 Duo Extreme X6800 processor, was sponsored by Intel. It had better be good if it costs so much!

To convince us it was not pure marketing talk, Intel gave us a few realtime demonstrations of the new Core architecture versus the old Netburst architecture. They showed how an average Core 2 Duo processor will not only beat the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition processor, but also do it with a much lower power consumption and at a much lower price point.

For some reason, Intel refrained from comparing the Core 2 Duo against processors from the big green monster, as the WCG champion Albert Lim was wont to describe AMD. They only concentrated on showing just how revolutionary the new Core architecture is, compared against the old Netburst architecture.

Intel Core 2 Duo

Let's take a step back in time to when CPUs were easy to understand. Comparing different processor to easy, the higher the clock speed of the chip, the faster it was. That's all there was to it, 3GHz was better than 2.4GHz, and that's all one needed to know. The numbers game has of course been relegated to a historical footnote by newer core technologies that re-wrote the rules - anyone remember the shock of a Core 2 Duo processor out pacing a pentinium 4 chip at twice the speed?

Moving from single core to dual-core processors had an immediate benefit in many computing situations; background appl could run on one core, while the other focused on the tasks at hand. Moving from two cores to four cores hasn't been quite the universal panacea for processing power. Only a few applications make effective use of all that parallel processing goodness....

Which brings us to the Intel Core 2 Duo E8400, a 3.0GHz dual-core processor based on the 'Wolfdale' core that is being manufactured on the 45nm process. This socket 755 processor packs in 6MB of L2 cache and operates with a 1333MHz Front Side Bus speed. The Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 retails for around $199 CDN ($170 USD, £113 GBP), which makes it considerably more affordable than quad-core processors with equivalent clock speed and cache.

So how does the E8400 compete against the new quad-core chips from AMD and Intel? While more cores can make a big difference in multi-threaded applications, they can also trip over themselves and slow down single-threaded applications. For everyday computer users, a fast dual-core CPU might be all the processing power you really need, let's find out!

Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Processor Tech Specs Core 2 Duo E8400 Clock: 3.0 GHz Codename: Wolfdale Cores: 2 L1: 2 x 64K L2: 6MB Multiplier: 9x FSB Bus: 1333 MHz Package: LGA775 Socket: 775 organic mPGA Core: 45nm Transistor: 400M Power: 65 Watts Vcore: 0.850-1.3625V Cost: $203 CDN

Intel's Core 2 Duo E8400 processor is physically similar to the Core 2 Duo E6750 (Conroe) and Socket 775 Pentium D processors that came before it. All of these processors use the Land Grid Array 775-pad package. intels move to a 45 nanometer manufacturing process means the silicon die here is approximately 104mm2 in area and contains around 410 million transistors. While the Core 2 Duo E8400 is a Socket 775 CPU, it isn't compatible with all Socket 775 motherboard due to different voltage requirements and processor power envelopes.

Currently the Intel X48, X38, P45, P35, G35, G33 and G31 chipsets have native support for 45nm 'Wolfdale' processors and will support the 1333MHz Front Side Bus speed. Motherboards with older chipsets may support Wolfdale processors like the E8400 processor though BIOS updates, although compatibility isn't universal. As always, check the vendor's support page before you pick up any new parts.

Due to its 45nm die-shrink, the Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 processor can be clocked at higher speeds yet maintain the same thermal design power (TDP) as the older 65nm E6000 series of processors. The typical TDP for the Core 2 Duo E8400 processor is 65W.

1333 MHz Front Side Bus Speed / 45nm Wolfdale Core

Wolfdale processors are currently Intel's fastest dual-core processors. You can identify a Wolfdale processor by its family series. The Intel E5000, E7000 and E8000-series are all based on the Wolfdale core, and share the same 45nm

The Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 is a member of the highest end family. All E8000-series processors have 410 million transistors, 6MB of L2 cache, run at a 1333MHz front side bus, and have a TDP of 65W. The lower end of the Wolfdale dual-core processor families scale down accordingly: the E7XXX family of processors have 3MB of cache and run at a 1066MHz FSB, and the Intel E5XXX family, which has 2MB of cache and runs at 800MHz FSB.

Intel Socket 775 'Wolfdale' 45nm Processors
Processor Models	Thermal Design Power	Clock Speed	FSB	L2 Cache Size	Price (USD)
Intel Core 2 Duo E8600	65W	3.33 GHz	1333MHz	6MB	$266
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500	65W	3.16 GHz	1333MHz	6MB	$183
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400	65W	3.0 GHz	1333MHz	6MB	$163
Intel Core 2 Duo E8300	65W	2.83 GHz	1333MHz	6MB	$163
Intel Core 2 Duo E8200	65W	2.66 GHz	1333MHz	6MB	$163
Intel Core 2 Duo E8190	65W	2.66 GHz	1333MHz	6MB	$163
Intel Core 2 Duo E7500	65W	2.93 GHz	1066MHz	3MB	$133
Intel Core 2 Duo E7400	65W	2.8 GHz	1066MHz	3MB	$113
Intel Core 2 Duo E7300	65W	2.66 GHz	1066MHz	3MB	$133
Intel Core 2 Duo E7200	65W	2.53 GHz	1066MHz	3MB	$113

Intel has also added some new instruction sets for its Wolfdale (dual-core) and Yorkfield (quad-core) 45nm processors. The new SSE4 (Supplemental Streaming SIMD Extension, if you were wondering) instructions consist of 47 new vector instructions, most of which focus on improving the processor's co-ordination with graphics and video acceleration.

Hardware has also improved, better for applications like VMware. Intel's improved assisted virtualization is better at managing requests from the virtual manager, which allows both the virtual machine and the native to make calls to the hardware without conflicting with one another. The larger, 6MB cache on the high-end Wolfdale processors is also very useful in these environments.

Intel's also talked a lot about how power efficient these new 45nm Wolfdale processors are going to be - so of course PCSTATS is going to put their claims to the test...

Intel Core 2 Duo E8400

Core 2 Duo E8400 Workhorse CPU

In this age of quad-core processors, can a dual-core processor really cut it? CPU manufacturers AMD and Intel have repeatedly emphasized that multi-threaded applications are the future of computing, and that both companies will soon relegate single and dual-core processors to entry-level markets. As quad-core processors become more widely adopted in the mid-range and high-end, we're going to see more developers taking advantage of them with multi-threaded software. There are already a few bleeding-edge applications like Bibble that do this.

Right now, however, these applications are few and far between. Most of the utilities, office applications and day-to-day software that's on the average computer won't know what to do with extra CPU cores and will be served by a processor with more cache or higher clock speeds.

Keeping this in mind, the spotlight is clearly on Intel's family of Core 2 Dup E8000-series Wolfdale processors. The Core 2 Duo E8400, with its 3.0GHz clock speed, 1333MHz FSB speed and 6MB of L2 cache, remains a force to be reckoned with. In tests like Sysmark that test common, real-world office applications, the E8400 was generally a little faster than the Phenom II X4 955 and a little slower than the Core i7 920. All processors are absolutely fast enough for average desktop applications likely to be encountered in the office or at home. The same holds true during gaming, where the majority of titles are more suited to high-frequency dual-core processors rather than parallel quad-core processors.

With a current street price of $199 CDN ($170 USD, £113 GBP) the Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 is $100 cheaper than the AMD Phenom II X4 955 and $150 than the least expensive Intel Core i7 processor. While the quad-core processors can definitely outclass the Core 2 Duo E8400 in certain scientific simulations, 3D rendering and video encoding benchmarks, they just don't deliver as much everyday value as a speedy dual-core processor.

Under the hood, the Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 isn't revolutionary. While the original Conroe E6000-series processors were manufactured on a 65nm process, the Wolfdale chips are produced at 45nm. Shrinking the chip has kept the E8400's power draw levels low, just 65W, so under full CPU load it actually draws less power than lower-performing processors. Intel has also added new SSE extensions, lower power states, and better hardware virtualization support.

Overclocking the Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 was dead simple, with only a minor bump in voltages required to move the processor from 3.0GHz up to 4.05GHz when using the stock Intel cooler. While we didn't do any official benchmarks at that speed, a 4GHz E8400 is enough to give the Core i7 920 a run for its money in many single and dual-core applications.

Given the benchmark results I think it's safe to say two things are clear. The Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 processor is handicapped against triple and quad-core processors in tests that are multi-threaded. In standard desktop applications that people use everyday, like Word or email, surfing the web or doing spreadsheets, the Core 2 Duo E8400 is more than powerful, and a very good value. While those that specialize in content creation may have already embraced quad-core processing, most everybody else will find that a speedy dual-core CPU like the Core 2 Duo E8400 is a better value.

Intel Core 2 Duo microprocessor

The architecture is called Core, processor family is Core 2, the product names are Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme. In the past we've talked about its architecture and even previewed its performance, but today is the real deal. We've all been waiting for this day, the day Intel lifts the last remaining curtain on the chip that is designed to re-take the performance crown from AMD, to return Intel to its days of glory.

It sure looks innocent enough:

Core 2 Duo (left) vs. Pentium D (right)

What you see above appears to be no different than a Pentium D. Honestly, unless you flip it over there's no indication of what lies beneath that dull aluminum heat spreader.

Core 2 Duo (left) vs. Pentium D (right)

But make no mistake, what you see before you is not the power hungry, poor performing, non-competitive garbage (sorry guys, it's the truth) that Intel has been shoving down our throats for the greater part of the past 5 years. No, you're instead looking at the most impressive piece of silicon the world has ever seen - and the fastest desktop processor we've ever tested. What you're looking at is Conroe and today is its birthday.

Intel's Core 2 launch lineup is fairly well rounded as you can see from the table below:

CPU	Clock Speed	L2 Cache
Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800	2.93GHz	4MB
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700	2.66GHz	4MB
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600	2.40GHz	4MB
Intel Core 2 Duo E6400	2.13GHz	2MB
Intel Core 2 Duo E6300	1.86GHz	2MB

As the name implies, all Core 2 Duo CPUs are dual core as is the Core 2 Extreme. Hyper Threading is not supported on any Core 2 CPU currently on Intel's roadmaps, although a similar feature may eventually make its debut in later CPUs. All of the CPUs launching today also support Intel's Virtualization Technology (VT), run on a 1066MHz FSB and are built using 65nm transistors.

The table above features all of the Core 2 processors Intel will be releasing this year. In early next year Intel will also introduce the E4200, which will be a 1.60GHz part with only a 800MHz FSB, a 2MB cache and no VT support. The E4200 will remain a dual core part, as single core Core 2 processors won't debut until late next year. On the opposite end of the spectrum Intel will also introduce Kentsfield in Q1 next year, which will be a Core 2 Extreme branded quad core CPU from Intel.

Core 2 Extreme vs. Core 2 Duo

Previously Intel had differentiated its "Extreme" line of processors by giving them larger caches, a faster FSB, Hyper Threading support, and/or higher clock speeds. With the Core 2 processor family, the Extreme version gets a higher clock speed (2.93GHz vs. 2.66GHz) and this time around it also gets an unlocked multiplier. Intel officially describes this feature as the following:

Core 2 Extreme is not truly "unlocked". Officially (per the BIOS Writers Guide), it is "a frequency limited processor with additional support for ratio overrides higher than the maximum Intel-tested bus-to-core ratio." Currently, that max tested ratio is 11:1 (aka 2.93G @ 1066 FSB). The min ratio is 6:1. However, do note that the Core 2 Extreme will boot at 2.93G unlike prior generation XE processors which booted to the lowest possible ratio and had to be "cranked up" to the performance ratio.

In other words, you can adjust the clock multiplier higher or lower than 11.0x, which hasn't been possible on a retail Intel chip for several years. By shipping the Core 2 Extreme unlocked, Intel has taken yet another page from AMD's Guide to Processor Success. Unfortunately for AMD, this wasn't the only page Intel took.

Manufacturing Comparison

The new Core 2 processors, regardless of L2 cache size, are made up of 291 million transistors on a 143 mm^2 die. This makes the new chips smaller and cheaper to make than Intel's Pentium D 900 series. The new Core 2 processors are also much smaller than the Athlon 64 X2s despite packing more transistors thanks to being built on a 65nm process vs. 90nm for the X2s.

CPU	Manufacturing Process	Transistor Count	Die Size
AMD Athlon 64 X2 (2x512KB)	90nm	154M	183 mm^2
Intel Core 2	65nm	291M	143 mm^2
Intel Pentium D 900	65nm	376M	162 mm^2

Intel's smaller die and greater number of manufacturing facilities results in greater flexibility with pricing than AMD.

Intel Core 2 Duo

Netburst is dead, and long live Core ! This is something Intel announced a little over a year ago. The Netburst architecture introduced with the Pentium 4 in November 2000 is now replaced by a new architecture called Core, available for desktop, mobile and server platforms.

Intel will release new Xeons in the days to come and at the end of July the Core 2 Duo LGA 775 processors. This is a great opportunity for BeHardware.com to study the release of Core architecture but also the performances of the Core 2 Duo product line in practice.

« The Core legacy »

To understand the technical aspects in Core architecture, it’s important to look at the past. We go back to the past few years to the end of 2000. At this time, the entire line of Intel processors (desktop, server and mobile) relied on P6 architecture, which was introduced 6 years ago with the Pentium Pro. Despite improvements going along with new versions it eventually started to run out of steam. This was especially true compared to AMD and the Athlon, which won a very symbolic and marketing race in Gigahertz. It was urgent for Intel to release a new architecture to replace the P6.

The introduction of a new architecture isn´t an easy task. It must, from its release, show at least as a good performance compared to the most advanced products based on the previous architecture and also (and mainly) have a potential for evolution in the next five or six years to come. This is the average time required to make R&D investments profitable and has been Intel´s way of proceeding since the start of its company even if the presence of competitors has tended to accelerate product renewal. The objective is to avoid reproducing the Pentium III EB 1.13 GHz mishap that pushed the P6 architecture to its limits in such a way that the processor had to be recalled and withdrawn from the market.

This was probably the main worry in evolution in the definition of Netburst architecture. Netburst has been conceived to provide growing performances throughout its lifespan. Let´s see how it was done.