Core 2 Duo Notebook CPU. Beyond 3.06 GHz?

Does Intel have any plan to release Core 2 Duo Notebook CPU faster than 3.06 GHz?

 

Why?

 

Just wondering. The faster, the better isn't it

 

Not always.

I'd prefer programmers to get with the program and learn to code threads in parallel so that low power multi CPU chips can be efficient, cheap and powerful by producing as much 'work' as today's 3Ghz+ 'monsters' offer, but at the cost of mobility and powerline dependance.

 

Likely not.

 

But that's for the future. Most current and older software benefits more from faster clock speed.

 

They have already released plenty of them.
The extreme versions.
Also you could overclock the non-extreme versions by overclocking your FSB.

 

Not necessarily. Most general usage computing in my experience like Office, Internet and Media doesn't push the CPU enough to where you'd notice a difference. Firefox will open just as fast on a Pentium M as a Core 2 Duo. There a faster hard drive is much more likely to make a noticeable performance increase. Now there are some apps like coding video or crunching databases where the extra clock speed or more cores will speed things up, but how often do you do those.

 

What is used to calculate computations per second? "Flops" or something like that?

Its important how much is calculated in one step - in that case for the same design of CPU (regarding architecture) more GHz is better - but the next generation does more work with each step.

Look at the Pentium 4 vs. Pentium M (on the Centrino platforms) - in terms of maxing out a CPU - Photoshop can do that with Photomerge, HDRs and RAW conversion

 

Raw processing power is measured in FLOPS (floating point operations pers second), basically all you do is multiply your clock frequency by the number of cores, thus giving me a total of 4.8giga FLOPS

 

Can't work like that - that means a P4 can be more powerful than a slower clocked Pentium M - that doesn't sound right.

 

At this point, unless some hidden massive fault in the new i3/5/7/9 Nehalem/Westmere architecture shows up, there's really no reason at all for Intel to bother making any new high end Core 2 Duo chips. Any such chip would have to compete directly against the new i-series chips, so Intel would have to expend R&D dollars to push and support old technology, when they already have newer technology I'm sure they'd rather spend the money on. I could maybe have seen more low end ULV C2Ds, but with the new ULV Arrandales, especially since those come with built-in IGP, there's really just no reason at all for Intel to come out with any new C2Ds.

 

If Turbo Boost isn''t cheating, then technically Intel have already released a 3.2Ghz notebook processor, other than the numerous Pentium 4 chips.

But hey, who gives a crap about P4 anymore?

 

Yes, but Turbo-Boost is i7, and the OP wants to know about new Core 2 Duos...

 

Core 2 Duo is dead.

Core 2 Quad is dead.

 

may these venerable processors rest in peace

 

Core 2 Duo may be dead but I won't replace my C2D laptop anytime soon. So, if Intel would keep upping the clock speed, that would be great.

 

Agreed, i feel 0% need to go for C2Q to i7, i'd class that as a pointless move .

 

Depending on what you do

Maybe if you like creating Gigapans (photographs) also some newer laptops with and i7 have a newer chipset supporting more RAM.

The average user is fine with a Core Duo - and else, well all the people who can max out their CPU generally never have enough "power".

 

Where's ur proof for this? Internet explorer on my laptop opens faster than Firefox on my Pentium M laptop even though there's nothing much installed.

Agreed on that... with core i7 tech, we can say bye bye to this... eventually its going to become as obsolete as pentium 4... if u want dual cores , wait arrandale... and for quad , u already got clarksfield...

 

Firefox is bottlenecked by the HDD - that's why it loads faster on a SSD - the processor is unimportant.

Most programmes at startup are bottlenecked by the HDD.