Core duo 1.6ghz vs. Core2Duo 1.83ghz

How much would the preformace vary while gaming and just doing everyday things. Is the core2duo worth the extra 100 dollars from dell??
Just wondering....

 

I'd like to give the quick response of "Yes", I think its worth the extra cash for the C2D.

 

Depending on what you're doing, but if you've got processor-intensive applications running, you'll get a 20% or so performance boost between the two because of the better core, increased clock and bus speed of the Core 2 Duo vs the Core Duo. (assuming you really meant a 1.6GHz Core Duo, and not a Core 2 Duo)

 

As Pitabred has already said, the difference will only be seen if you are doing some processor intensive task running. Encoding, video rendering, and other things things are quite processor intensive, and in that case, the Core 2 Duo 1.83 GHz will be faster. This is mostly due to the slightly improved architecture. If you are just word processing and surfing the Internet, then there will be practically no difference, and it isn't worth the extra $100.

 

One thing you may also want to consider is how long you plan on having the laptop. A C2D will more "future proof" your purchase. I have been running with a P3 650MHz PC since 2001. For email, word processing, spreadsheets and surfing the internet, I do not need anything more. We just purchased a scanner however and my wife started getting into pictures, graphics and the like. It does okay, but it definitely is showing its age with these types of applications.

About a month ago I treated myself to what you see in my signature. Thus far it has not skipped a beat ...

 

The 1.83 C2D only has 2MB of L2 cache, negating one of the major advantages of the other C2D (4MB L2 cache). There will not be a huge performance difference between the two you are looking at. The performance differences between CD and C2D are more apparent at the high end, not the low end. I would take that $100 and get more RAM, or faster/larger hard drive.

 

Well Do Remember that the Core 2 Duo is a 64bit Interface, and if your looking for a future proof laptop, I recommend getting the C2D.

I still use an old Pentium 4 to play fairly modern games...so if your on a budget, the Core Duo will be great as well, but I would personally buy the C2D.

 

not to thread jack but is there any difference at all between say a Core Duo T2050 (1.6GHz, 533 FSB) and a Core 2 Duo T5200 (1.6GHz, 533 FSB)? Is the only difference between those two the 64-bit instruction set?

 

Performance wise, there is pretty much no difference. However, the two do have different architectures. Though, the difference between the architectures is not enough, to impact performance of the two. So yes, the only main difference is that 64-bit extension you have stated.

 

It's a LOT more than just cache between the C2D and the CD. The C2 has more pipelines, more instruction decoders, a larger reorder buffer, more SSE, arithmetic and floating point units. All of these make even the low-range C2D's noticeably faster than their CD counterparts of the same frequency. Note that the CPU's tested in the second link both have 2MB of cache, and the C2D still averages ~13% faster than the CD of the same frequency, so if we take the 1.6GHz CD as a baseline, assuming the same FSB and the 13% from the article, you'd get that the 1.83GHz C2D is roughly equivalent to a 2GHz CD, or a 20% difference in performance when you compare a 1.6GHz CD to a 2GHz CD, ie. the 1.83GHz C2D. Plus free 64bit functionality from the C2D.

 

That link you posted had them use core and core 2 duos in the same notebook? I thought you had to update the BIOS before you can just stick a core 2 in there.

 

I'm pretty sure a BIOS update is all you need.

 

Sure, you may have to update the BIOS. But an updated BIOS will not prevent you from running a Core Duo in the machine, it just enables you to run EITHER a Core Duo OR a Core 2 Duo.