is dv 6000,1.83 dual core 2 64 bit or not?

does my dv 6000 ,with intel dual core 2 1.83 GHZ ,support 64 bit,so i can install the 64bit version of vista,or not,anybody knows or have tried.

 

if its core 2 duo then yes

 

It should be but just for the record just because its core 2 duo doesnt mean its 64bit. Just like not all core duos are. Id say take the Txxxx and look it up on Intels website. It will have the infor there if its 64bit or not

 

If you mean Core 2 Duo, then yes, it is a 64-bit processor, capable of running the 64-bit version of Windows Vista.

 

What about Core Duo, is that 32bit or 64bit? I heard answers to both? :S

 

I was incorrect about the core 2 duos. I just went to look to make sure and they are all 64bit. Just the core duos are not all. I belive they start being 64bit around 1.83. The 1.73 isnt. Again the easiest way to make sure is go to intels site and put in the Txxxx and look up the specs.

 

Core Duo is 32-bit. Core 2 Duo is a 64-bit CPU, but it's worth noting that a Core 2 Duo laptop you buy today is still running on a 32-bit architecture. You will need to wait for Santa Rosa to debut in May to get a fully 64-bit platform.

Having said that, if your concern is being able to run the 64-bit version of Windows Vista, you can. You just aren't going to get many of the benefits of a 64-bit CPU until Santa Rosa.

 

How is it that the Core 2 Duo is running on a 32bit architecture if its a 64bit CPU. That would totaly defeat the fact it is runing 64bits of info at a time.

 

In fact here is something off an article talking about the MacBook. Even though its not a PC the CPU remains the same. The core 2 duo is a 64bit architecture CPU.

With its 64-bit processor architecture, the Intel Core 2 Duo can manipulate data and execute instructions in chunks that are twice as large (64 bits versus 32 bits), delivering advanced computational power to MacBook.
http://www.apple.com/macbook/intel.html

 

From what I understood, core 2 duo's where 64-bit and core duo's where 32-bit. You can read a lot at wikipedia...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_2

The intel website says the same stuff!

 

Core: A revamped Pentium M. it's 32-bit *only*. Core Solo is single core, Core Duo is dual-core. But all of them are 32 bit.

Core 2: An entirely new architecture. All Core 2 chips can run 64 bit as well as 32 bit mode. Core 2 Duo is dual-core, and Core 2 Solo is... not available.

 

Reread... This time last year Intel spoke about a 64-bit core duo chip. They were talking about core 2 duo, and that confused lots of people. Even their own reps.

All core 2 duo = 64-bit, All core duo = 32-bit.

Both the Sossaman and Yonah core duo chips lack EM64T!

 

I've got to say, if I didn't know better, I would guess that Intel was intentionally trying to confuse people.

You've got Core Duo and Core 2 Duo, in both mobile and desktop versions. The worst case of consumer confusion I think I would see in this is with Apple's iMac, which uses the Core 2 Duo, but the mobile version; but since the mobile and desktop CPU's have the same name, an iMac buyer would have no reason to not think it was a "desktop" CPU in there.

Even outside of that though, you have Core Duo and Core 2 Duo chips, and some companies are still selling laptops with both versions as options. I would be hard pressed to find a typical consumer that would know what the difference is, not to mention what the "2" in "Core 2 Duo" means. I'm curious about what the future naming conventions will be.... I think I've heard Core 2 Quad, but I wonder if we'll see "Core 3 Duo", "Core 3 Quad".

And I guess someone at Intel thought it wasn't confusing enough, because now there is a low cost chip called "Pentium Dual Core"..........

 

this is not like the old days when intel released their 64bit server CPU and it was 64bit only. These days your so-called 64bit CPU is backward compatible which means it can run in a 32bit environment just fine but can also be used in a 64bit one. Not sure if it still applies but back in the days before Intel got their mainstream 64bit CPUs out, AMD had released their 64bit athlons and basically you were able to easily run a 64bit OS with a 32bit program in it using a compatibility mode built into the CPU's architecture. 64bit CPUs were out long before XP64 was released so imagine how useless it wouldve been to release a product that noone can use!

 

nothing wrong with having the same/similar name for ur mobile and desktop brands. i think they are essentially the same, performance wise but for the platform, the C2D desktop was based on the ideas and success of the Pentium M since the Pentium 4 and D were failing to beat AMD's desktops