Intel Core 2 Duo T7500 or T8300?

Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T7500 (2.2GHz/800Mhz FSB, 4MB Cache)

​

OR
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T8300 (2.4GHz/800Mhz FSB, 3MB Cache)

They both cost the same amount of money to configure.

Also, I have a rather stupid question. Is a Pentium 4 3.2 GHZ processor faster than a Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHZ processor? If not, why?

 

the t8300... though i dont understand why they drop the amount of L2 cache... perhaps others can clarify.

a core2duo 2.2 is faster in everyway compared to pentium 4 3.2ghz. the reason is... even though the clockspeed isn't high; it gulps more processes at each go.

 

#1 I would go T8300 Kind of a no brainer!
#2 Not at all C2D will kill in almost anyway!

 

I 'd say the T8300 if the prices are similar.

But in my area , the T8300 is about 120US more than the T7500, so in this case I would go for the T7500 or T8100.

 

The reason that there is 3MB of cache now is that there is 6MB with half disabled, and only the very high end chips get the full 6MB. It's like how with the T7xx0 series, the low end had a 2MB cache and the high end a 4MB cache.

Also, a Core 2 Duo 2.2GHz is faster, as the Pentium 4s were very inefficient so a high clock speed was needed, whereas the Core 2s are very efficient so it takes a lot lower clock speed to get the same performance. From my experience, a 1.6GHz Core 2 is about the same speed as a 3.2GHz Pentium 4

 

Pentium 4 was also a single core cpu, so it would get stomped by virtually any dual core..........

 

Why would they do that??? That's like putting 4gb of RAM in your machine and only being able to use 3gb!

I always assumed the lower cache was just a design or cost consideration. For example, maybe Intel decided the T8xxx wouldn't make full use of 4MB so they dropped it down.

Anyway, get the T8300 if the cost is the same. If it's more expensive get the T7500 unless you plan on trying to upgrade your CPU later.

 

It is also a way to sell cpus that failed quality control tests. If a portion of the L2 cache was bad, it can be rebranded as a lesser cpu.......

 

What??? That sounds even more insane!

So the T8xxx could be a T9xxx that couldn't pass tests?

This is all new to me... and pretty interesting.

 

This has been done for years by both Intel & AMD. A failed Turion becomes a budget Athlon, a failed Core 2 Duo becomes a Pentium Dual Core (etc, etc)....

I imagine that not many cpus are truely unsaleable when using these practices, as even a malfunctioning one can have some investment return......

 

Though most people wouldnt use even 5-10% of the CPU's capability, it is all marketing stuff to claim 3MB or 6MB etc, just to make you feel that you need a higher CPU and spend more $$$

I think for most people 1MB cache would suffice.

If both of them are the same price, go in for T8300, because the additional cache in T7500 would not make any difference unless you are into video editing or the likes.

But the T8300 is 45nm technology which means lesser heat and better battery life.

C2D will outperform P4 anyday. But again, soon we will have C2Q and C2O for notebooks and your C2D will look timid. Its all marketing by Intel and Microsoft to make you buy better hardware and also upgrade to the latest OS, so that the two companies can sell their stuff and multiply their $$$