What's your opinion about Merom? I am disappointed.

I am planning to buy DELL XPS M1210 when core 2 duo becomes available, but these benchmarks are disappointing.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808&p=1

This is a link to some merom benchmarks. I felt disappointed just like I did when Turion X2 came out (mainly about battery life).

I was expecting improvements in battery life over core duo, but it seems that merom has pretty much the same battery life as core duo ...

I know people would argue that it has better performance, but that should be only noticeable in benchmarks!

The only thing good about merom is that it is 64 bit ... but who needs it right now ... (and running Merom in 64 bit would decrease its performance)

Hopefully, merom will run cooler, because lots of the core duo notebooks i've used run very hot. (I own a AMD desktop and a MacBook and I want a Merom to run Vista 64. I really think I can fry eggs on my MacBook).

 

well i think you'll see more of the performance go up once its running windows vista on 64 bit then it can be fully utulitized as far as performance then i think the santa rosa platform, so basically when the time has come and vista is out you'll be getting better performance at same battery life

 

Don't think that 64 bit is going to give a siginficant performance boost. All the game and application benchmarks in XP 64 have been pretty disappointing. With the system-hog that Vista is, I don't see Vista outperforming XP 64.

 

The reason why I wanted improvements on battery life is that Vista's 3D premium user interface will drain the battery like playing games ...

Merom is a laptop processor. If it wants to run Vista with its premium user interface (that's what attracts me most right now), it should try to improve battery life. Actually, I would rather sacrifice performance for battery life--few people would squeeze the last drop out of their duo core processor these days.

 

well before you get all dissapointed. This release of core 2 duo was mainly to add more l2 cache and 64 bit thats about it. I wont be dissapoited with more cache and 64bit support for the same price as a core duo. Now if they were charging $100 more then yeah I would.

 

If you ask me, I don't see how Core 2 Duo isn't an achievement in power efficiency and utilization. You can hardly judge the line when you have yet to see the Low-Voltage and Ultra-Low Voltage versions of Merom come to fruition either, which will certainly deliver longer battery life in smaller packages.

Your demands have already been met; more performance for the same amount of power used means a greater performance/watt ratio, which means you can easily lower the clock and voltage of the chip to attain better battery life compared to predecessors while still maintaining performance. The only difference is in the marketing: Core 2 Duo (standard version) is a direct replacement for Core Duo, so it is performance that is emphasized.

Remember that even though Vista has a 3D interface, it isn't likely to be a load anywhere near comparable to games. An OS interface doesn't have to waste power rendering complex frames all the time... only when it is required to do so.

 

Sounds like I'll be waiting on the Santa Rosa in 2007.

 

It's still a waste. Battery life in notebooks is comparable to MPG in cars. If they would invest the gain from new innovations into better battery life (or MPG) instead of wasting it on making heavier more powerful notebooks with bigger and faster everything (or heavier cars with more HP) then 4-5 hours would be the bare minimum standard for notebook life unlike the 2-3 that it actually is today. OLED-backlit displays and solid state hard drives stand to improve notebook battery life by 50% over the next few years, but of course the end result will be the same 2-3 hour standard due to faster hotter parts and more bloated resource hungry operating systems.

 

Totally. It's like GM making Hummers. Microsoft has done nothing (zip means zip) to improve battery life in Vista. Vista drinks battery like a SUV does with petrol. Of course, the beta has holes, and others are going to say it's too early to judge, but come January, I would highly doubt any improvement in resource use or battery life.

Hopefully OLED screens are improved to overcome their two to four year lifespan. They have been relegated largely to cell phones due to this

 

I would not feel disappointed if INTEL advertise core 2 duo like you said(a direct replacement for core duo). However, Intel advertised their new core 2 duo to be highly energy efficient with the new architecture...

 

Core 2 Duo wasnt meant to become a revolution in terms of power and speed. Thats what Yonah did, basically leapfrogging PM's and also the Turion64 series. Now Merom just comes in with slight performances and boosts in speeds, but nothing amazing. Really, too many people had high hopes for a processor that is nothing but revolutionizing the mobile market. What did Intel create? They created a processor that people can comfortably multitask and also not have as much power as previous Pentiums.

 

How can I be dissapointed with Memrom when I haven't even tried it?

 

I don't think it's quite comparable like that. Perhaps a better analogy would be that the battery life (or capacity, rather) is your fuel tank. MPG is your performance/watt ratio. Cars haven't changed their range much in many years. A "Hummer" approach would be to use a much larger battery and to use a desktop CPU or increase application bloat, hence getting less efficiency.

What you're looking for is a car that travels 1000 miles on a single tank - but clearly, with few exceptions, the market doesn't provide it because the need hasn't arised. It's really not Merom's fault - it could achieve that goal as it is (especially in ultra-low voltage variety). I do think you will see more manufacturers tuning into this as time goes by, though.

 

I think what happened is that everyone got caught up in the hype. Unfortunately the hype around the web was about Conroe, not Merom. The Pentium D was junk, Conroe is a HUGE improvement over the current offerring. On the other hand, Yonah was a great chip, there was not a lot of room for improvement without addressing the things that Santa Rosa will address. Yonah prety much maxed out the Napa platform, and it is proven in the benchmarks. Merom will show its real potential when they are running on the Santa Rosa platform.

 

They do that for every processor line they do

 

I'll wait until santa rosa and upgrade sometime mid next year.

 

The best is waiting until santa rosa is released. Now is the same that when the dothan core was launched. It's fsb was only 400mhz but when the platform sonoma released it was 533mhz. The better chooice is wait until the new platform is released

 

So... where's the disappointment? Better performance for the same price as a Yonah chip? I must be missing something.

And I'd take an American V8 over a dirty little import I4 any day

 

Um, you're disappointed that it runs 15% faster without consuming more power? You haven't considered that it also means it's able to consume less power at the same performance level?

It is a hell of a lot more than that.

Oh yeah, and very unbiased poll. There's no option for "I actually don't think Merom is a disappointment" in any way or shape.

 

"I will buy a Merom--it is way better than a Core Duo(Yonah)"

That choice is exactly what u described, and its right there...did u miss it?

 

Oh oops...
I must be going blind.

 

It's ok, we all have one of those days...

 

I think I'm just going to get a Core Duo now, and when I need Vista 64 bit version, then I'll get it. By then, it's probably really cheap.

 

My breakdown of Merom vs Yonah:

Up to 20% faster at same clock speed? Check.
Same battery life? Check.
64-bit support? Check.
Less heat output? Check.
Same price as Yonah at same clocks? Check.

I intentionally bought a low-end Yonah in order to upgrade to a high-end Merom at a later date. Not only will I gain a lot of speed in going from 1.6GHz to 2.3GHz, but I'll also gain the enhancements of the new architecture.

 

I might end up getting a Merom to put in my desktop. While the Conroe is great, I prefer a low power consuming desktop. Although of course that in itself is generally an oxymoron its still possible. Merom is rated at roughly 35 watts TDP while Conroe is around 60s.

Right now I have a Yonah T2600 on a Aopen I975Xa-YDG running at stock speeds with voltage tuned to the lowest number necessary to run stable with an underclocked 7600GT. Can barely hear the system running when it is on and under full load.

 

Just to clarify something - the Core 2 Duo will have the same pricing as the current Core Duo, and I have not heard of any price drops going into effect for the CD after the C2D's release.

The C2D has the same power consumption and heat output as the CD, except it either ties it or beats it (more likely) in every performance test I've seen.
Now, the reason we are not seeing as big of a performance increase as there could be is because of the front-side bus. At 667MHz, it is somewhat of a bottleneck, and considering that both the CD and C2D are very similar in architecture, there are not going to be huge performance gains. Once Santa Rosa is released next year, we'll get more performance gains because Merom will then have a proper 800MHz FSB.

 

I'm confused as to how you can be disappointed. Unless you bought a Core Duo laptop hoping to upgrade to a Core 2 Duo and expect even MORE performance, there's not really much difference. All the real upgrades were done to the CD.

Frankly, the Core 2 Duo was based somewhat on the Core Duo and previous Pentium M chips, so you aren't really going to see a large performance increase anyway. Whatever the Core Duo can do, the Core 2 Duo can also.

 

I totally agree. When I'm buying something, I want to make sure that I'm making a worthwhile purchase that won't be outdated soon.

 

By saying that man, you make us feel pretty old...

True that by the time Santa Rosa comes out, us Merom and Napa platform owners are going to feel outdated, but with this upgrade of CPU, Im actually happy that my notebook can last for a long period of time and still take in upgrades.

 

I think what is really disapointing is the branding/naming Intel is using...they choose to complicate things (and end users) with this Core 2 Duo thing.
Next will be Core 2 Quad ans Core Quad 2, etc...nonsense.
Why not building a better mkt campaign with a good new name and boost their market share? Like with the first Pentium era.

 

Well there is a method to their naming. The actual name of the chip is Core. This is the second generation, hence 2. Duo refers to the number of cores. So you get Core2Duo. If you look at the emblem it makes sense, but most people, it will go over their head. They kinda had to do a name change, because these chips are not anything like the Pentium 4. In fact, they have more in common with Pentium 3, imagine that!

But I agree the names do not exactly roll of the tongue.

 

Echoing cashmonee, that's why there are Core Solo's that Intel is selling in the really cheap laptops. It's their direct replacement for a Pentium M. Basically a core duo with one of the cores disabled (probably due to defect or whatnot), but they still wanted to sell it

 

Personally I think the only major point of meron is the 64-bit part, everything else to me is not worth it.

 

Right on about the PIII part. Belarc Advisor identifies my machine as have a PIII 1.83GHz!! (I have a T2400)

 

I would not be complaining, expecially with merom matching the price of it's yonah counterparts. If you think about it, what you buy now will always be outdated in 6 months, so just buy when you see something you need. If it is an 800 FSB rather than a 667, go for it. But by that time a 1 GHz FSB will probably be on the horizon, so choose wisely.

 

I agree that the major advancements with Merom will come with Santa Rosa and the implementation of faster FSB.

I think that if you have a Yonah system now or can't wait for Merom, you will be fine with the Yonah for the life of your notebook.

There are many new technologies on the horizon, Vista, Santa Rosa, DX10, to name a few. But your current system be it Yonah or the current Merom should get you through for at least a couple of years until you will need a new system.

And then at that point, Santa Rosa, DX10, and all those technologies will be cheaper. You'll just have to worry about buying "the new thing" at that time.

 

If you need something soon though, the Merom's will be shipping with 667MHz FSB's in what, 2 months now? End of September? Not too long to wait for a "free" 10-20% speed upgrade.
Santa Rosa and all will be nice though, especially if you want integrated graphics. If not, then you're only basically waiting for a 133MHz FSB upgrade. Whether that's worth it or not is up to you.