After the desert time lived by INTEL with his Pentium 4 Prescott and other Pentium D, the founder had to badly re-examine things on the level of his organization. The strategy of microprocessors development moved thus much for effective core witch was called core duo . there is three category: PC, server and notebooks. Core duo architecture is available on our PC recently by the name of Conroe, as for server under name Woodcrest,and it arrives on the notebook platforms via Merom. The architecture of Merom being identical to that of Conroe. Simply let us specify that Merom is a processor with dual core, which deals with the instructions 64 bits via the EM64T, but also the support of SSE4 and has 2 or 4 mb in it s second cache level ,the cache is shared between the cpu so eath one of them can get acess to the full ammount of cache avaible in case of amd processor the cache can not be shared each cpu has it is own.

the mobile version of Core 2 duo, in other words Merom has identical architecture but their power consumption are lower than its counterpart for desktop PC Conroe. This is possible due to the more modest operation frequency , the maximum being fixed for the moment at 2,33 GHz, and also reduced frequency bus. Whereas Core 2 duo for desktop PC uses the FSB of 1066 MHz, Merom is satisfied 667 MHz... Result that the theoretical bandwidth between the chipset and the CPU passes from 8,5 Gig/s to 5,3 Gig/s. the voltage of the processor is also reduced what influences directly the TDP value of Core 2 duo This one does not exceed 34 Watts and this is the same for the fastest model! Let us recall that Core Duo had a TDP of 31 Watts and Pentium M was satisfied with 21 Watts. In short paper, Core 2 duo seems to dissipate more heat than its predecessors. comparing Core duo with Core 2 duo Merom will result iin improves on certain technologies aiming to better managing its power consumption. Dynamic Bus clock, was already present on Core Duo or Yonah, and which makes possible to stop the chipset with the processor in certain operating modes " low frequency ".

Although Core 2 Duo portable computers, are known under the name of Merom , the first representative of Intel architecture Core in the mobiles computer, one can wonder about the real contributions vis-a-vis with the very recent Yonah. Let us remember that INTEL gave to Pentium M a successor this is Core Duo in January this year! Less than nine months after, Core Duo will leave the place for Core 2 duo , we have to check in this article the performances profit brought by Core 2 duo vs Core Duo. For that we will use two Asus notbook of series A8J.

intel core duo vs core duo 2

INTEL Core 2 duo for portables: Merom

Processor INTEL Core 2 duo (Merom) INTEL Core duo (Yonah)

made in 65 Nm with 291 million transistors, just like Core 2 duo, Merom uses different format. they use borth the same Socket the PGA479. there is Not need to change chipset to deal with Core 2 duo! u can finds Core 2 duo in chipset i945 in case of Core Duo. we should wait for the beginning of 2007 so INTEL will launches a new platform, known for the moment under the name of code Santa-Rosa and in particular using higher FSB fixed at 800 MHz.

Core 2 duo T7200 cpu-z screen shot

Let us finish by specifying that the range of processors Core 2 duo for portable computers is composed today of five references. the chips for desktop computers have starting with the letter E, the Merom chips for portables start by the letter T. The models provided with 2 mb cache have the number sequence to start by 5 whereas the models equipped with 4 Mb begin with 7. Remain the great question to know if the 4 Mo is needed for notebook computer.

First portable Core 2 duo: Asus A8JP

Asus like usualy is the first manufacturer to make portable equipped with the last technologies coming from INTEL. we had the representative of series A8J, and more precisely the model A8JP. The last Asus baby weighs in the 2,4 kilo .Only one button is enough to open it and thus reach the keyboard. Note that the screen has a closing system with two fixings and those remain apparent, even when it is open. Since we evoke the screen, let us specify that it is14,1 inches, known as "broad", which offers the maximum resolution of 1440x900 . . Above the screen appears a rather discrete webcam of which the ir is a resolution of 0,3 mega pixel.

The touchpad is shown rather delicate it seems to be equipped only with one button. In truth according to whether you click with the left or the right-hand side , the produced click will not be identical. A run aiming zone when replacing the serrated roller is also present on the touchpad. the starting button is provided with small green diode, the portable have three diodes above the keyboard indicating the hard disk activity , locking capital letter or the locking of the numerical keys. four additional diodes indicating the operation of the portable, as well as the state of the radio operator circuits (Bluetooth, Wi-Fi). Note that the fourth diode is reserved for the battery and flash only when this one is reloaded.

Before detailing with the hardware configuration of the A8JP, we delay on it s connector industry, . in The left section a port USB 2.0, a FireWire connector and two catches audio 3,5 mm f and the microphone. in addition to the dvd rw graver, a card reader memories SD/MMC/Memory Stick for an expander card ExpressCard. Damage that Asus did not consider useful to add a compatible reader Compact Flash. in the back of this portable u will finds a connector VGA DB15, a connector DVI-D, an exit S-Video, two ports USB 2.0, a connector for the power pack, a Ethernet RJ45 as well as a RJ11 for the integrated modem. finally Side right with two ports USB 2.0 and one window for integrated module IRDA. Accessibility question of the different components, the A8JP easily offers access to the hard disk, but also to the more sensitive elements like the processor, the memory or the graphics board. note ithat the cooling system of the processor and video card is shared: a copper radiator connected by two heat-pipes to the hearts of processor and the graphics chip, the radiator being supplemented by a ventilator.

Portable Asus A8JP

Since we speak about the components, we should now detail the hardware configuration of this portable. Asus impressed us and we have here right to Core 2 duo T7200 working at 2 GHz, accompanied by 2 Gig of memory DDR2-667 format SO-DIMM and in double channel. The mother board chipset is INTEL i945M with ICH7M DH, whereas the graphics board is interesting. Asus proposes the Radeon Mobility X1700 to us signed ATI and presenting itself at format MXM. We will return later for the particular characteristics of this Radeon Mobility X1700. for the hard disk, Asus still generous with a disc format Serial-ATA offering a capacity of 160 Gig. disk used was from ' Hitachi with 5400 rpm/minute and equipped with 8 Mb of cache memory. With regard to Wi-Fi, Asus use the circuit INTEL 3945ABG already used by the Napa platform with its launching at the beginning of January. Asus does not forget Bluetooth and integrates consequently a radio circuit operator compatible Bluetooth 2.0. The Ethernet management is entrusted with the good known chip Realtek gigabit whereas the audio chip used is SoundMax compatible type AD1986A High Definition Audio. , the integrated DVD-RW allows to read CD and DVD, and also to write your CD and DVD+/-R, including the double-layerdiscs . burning Speeds is equal to 8x for the DVD+/-R whereas it is necessary to be satisfied with 2,4x for the double-layer discs . the battery, model is six cells 4800mAh.

Access to the components of the A8JP...

ATI Radeon Mobility X1700

little less than a year ago, ATI introduced its new range of graphics chips with Radeon X1000. A few days after the advertisement of the complete range, ATI launched in the tread their alternatives bound for the portable computers under the name of Radeon Mobility. Until now, the high end chip from ATI on this segment was Radeon Mobility X1600, otherwise called M56. This last found a successor with M66, that the Canadian should officialize in the next few weeks. Behind the code name M66,was hidin the Radeon Mobility X1700 . heriting the architecture of Radeon X1000 series, the chip is compatible Shader Model 3.0. Radeon Mobility X1700 begins with identical characteristics as the X1600 model with 12 pixels shaders processors and 4 textures units . ATI will communicate the exact chip characteristics , it is difficult for us to know what it really brings, but according to our benchmarks the Radeon Mobility X1600 and the X1700 ae pretty equal in performanc terms... it seems that the passage from M56 to M66 means for ATI changing foundry with with the key of lower thermal release, the new graphics chip is manufactured by UMC and not by TSMC.

ATI Radeon Mobility X1700 CATALYST driver

With the 128 bits memory bus ,the Radeon Mobility X1700 is equipped with HyperMemory technology witch enables it to draw additional memory from the system and allocate more memory if needed by 3d game or program . On our Asus portable, M66 the card have 256 Mb of video memory DDR2 ( Infineon chips with 2,5 NS) and the video card can address up to 512 Mb of video memory. Side operation frequencies , the graphics chip operates at 475 MHz whereas the memory run at 400 MHz. Opposite, the VPU of Radeon Mobility X1600 witch have the same frequency,.

3d Performances Radeon Mobility X1700 vs Radeon Mobility X1600 benchmark

we used our two portables Asus, the A8JA and the A8JP by equipping them with the same processor, Core Duo T2600 (2,16 GHz). The driver used are the last available at the date of the test, we do not integrate any optimizations from the CATALYST 6.8. we connect here an external screen to the two portables in order to test them in standard resolutions.

3DMark 06

3d 2006 benchmark ati x1700 mobility x1600 mobility

Far Cry v1.33

far cry benchmark ati x1700 mobility x1600 mobility

Half-Life 2 Lost Coast

half life benchmark ati x1700 mobility x1600 mobility

F.E.A.R. v1.06

fear benchmark ati x1700 mobility x1600 mobility

Quake 4 - v1.02

quake 4 benchmark ati x1700 mobility x1600 mobility

These five tests show, each one on their level, that with equivalent configuration Radeon Mobility X1700 equalizes its predecessor, Radeon Mobility X1600. The performances are very often identical between the two chips, and when Radeon Mobility X1700 overrides its rival it is without any doubt because of its slightly higher memory frequency. The most positive result for Radeon Mobility X1700: performances 3 % higher than Radeon Mobility X1600 under 3DMark 06 in 1024x768.

In order to test the performances of Merom, we used two portable computers Asus of the A8 series. One was equipped with a processor Core Duo T2500 to 2 GHz (Yonah), the other of Core 2 duo T7200 to 2 GHz (Merom). The interest is that here the two processors function at the same frequency what makes it possible to establish a valid comparison on the contribution of Intel architecture Core vs current Core Duo. for more exact test we ensured to use identical components on the two portables detail appears below:

Asus A8JA,
Processors INTEL Core duo T2500 2 GHz & Core duo T2600 2,16 GHz (Yonah),
2x1 Gig memory DDR2 667,
Graphics card ATI Radeon Mobility X1600,
Hard disk Hitachi 120 Gig Ultra-ATA 4200 rpm
Asus A8JP,
Processor INTEL Core 2 Duo T7200 2 GHz (Merom),
2x1 Go memory DDR2 667,
Graphics card ATI Radeon Mobility X1700,
Hard disk Hitachi 160 Gig Serial-ATA 5400 rpm

we changed the processor of our A8JA with Core Duo T2600 (Yonah) given it the speed of 2,16 GHz. Our two portables turned under Windows XP Professionnel Service Pack 2 and used the last driver, patchs and BIOS available at the date of test. Lastly, we will oppose the three mobile systems to a configuration from desktop entry range, this configuration also contain Core 2 duo, detail are below:

Asus P5B Deluxe,
INTEL Core 2 Duo E6300 (1.86 GHz),
2x1 Gig memory Corsair Twin2X 5400C4 (DDR2 667),
video card ATI Radeon X1600 Pro,
Hard disk Hitachi 80 Gig Serial-ATA 150 .This system also used Windows XP Professionnel Service Pack 2 as well as the last driver and BIOS available at the date of the test.

Cinebench 9.5

cinebench Intel core Duo T2500 vs e6300 t2600 t7200

we starts with Cinebench 9.5 which render 3d scene on several ways. Based on th professional application Cinema4D engine, the software logically benefits from the dual core processors and their capacity at the same time to treat two threads. According to this test, Merom, Core 2 duo T7200, is the fastest processor. with its predecessor, Yonah, the of performances profit at identical frequency is equal to 13 %. notes that Core Duo working at 2,16 GHz approaches the performances of the new come, Merom here beats its equivalent desktop PC it true is that this last work at only 1,86 GHz.

PCMark05 - cpu

pcmark Intel core Duo 2 T2500 vs e6300 t2600 t7200

The synthetic test PCMark 05 evaluates here the rough performances of our processors. Result, Merom is at the head, but with very light advantage on Yonah with 2,16 GHz. vs Core duo T2500, Core 2 duo T7200, at 2 GHz, is here 9 % more powerful.

PCMark05 - Overall

pamark Intel core Duo T2500 vs e6300 t2600 t7200

we continues with PCMark 05 but this time with the test report. PCMark05 precedes here the frequency and Core Duo T2600 have the head.Core 2 duo T7200 beat the Core Duo T2500 whereas desktop Core 2 duo the E6300 model, is at the seond place thanks to its higher system bus (1066 MHz vs 667 MHz).

ScienceMark 2.0 - Primordia

science mark Intel core Duo T2500 vs e6300 t2600 t7200

ScienceMark tests the calculation performances of our various processors. The pure frequency seems here to override the mask of the architecture effectiveness , since Core Duo T2600 at 2,16 GHz beats all other intel cpu INTEL, in fact Core 2 duo T7200 work at 2 GHz. noted that vs the Yonah 2 GHz (Core Duo T2500), the new INTEL processor is 7 % faster at the same frequency.

Mathematica 5.1

mathematicaIntel core Duo T2500 vs e6300 t2600 t7200

Mathematica tests the performances of our processors as mathematical calculation. Small nuance however, the results are expressed in seconds, so th lowest is the better: the longest bar represent the slowest CPU. new Core 2 duo T7200 posted here like the fastest processor, preceding Core Duo T2600. At identical frequency operation, Core 2 duo T7200 is faster here than its predecessor with an advantage of approximately 10 %.

Compression Test - WinRAR 3.60

We do not forget the daily use application , with WinRAR benchmark we can have a good idea how performe those diferent cpu in zip/unzip application. Here we used its last version famous small software of compression was put in situation and must compress some 250 mb of data. The results are expressed in seconds since we measure, the time taken by each platform to generate our RAR file . Here our Merom or Core 2 duo T7200 do as well as Core 2 duo desktop, the E6300 model,. But Core 2 duo E6300 can count on a higher FSB and a hard disk with 7200 rpm. Core duo T2500,lose by 12.5% vs the new Core 2 duo T7200 here . In the facts Merom enables us to gain 9 seconds on our compression.

Video encoding Test - Windows Media Encoder 9.0

encoding benchmark Intel core Duo T2500 vs e6300 t2600 t7200

The video encoding test consists, as its name , to measure time necessary for converting AVI file into a video with format WMV9. The results are always expressed in seconds and our Core 2 duo T7200 is here the leader . Core 2 duo E6300 reserved with desktop PC is the second,we note again that this cpu operate at only 1,86 GHz and equipped with 2 Mb on its second level.Core duo T2500, Yonah, is last from INTEL compression in one more minute !

lame MP3 compression

With lame we measure time necessary to encod 14 files WAVE into MP3 format . The results are expressed in seconds, and here Core Duo T2600 at 2,16 GHz and Core 2 duo T7200 at 2 GHz are in equality. Core Duo T2500 just finishes last behind Core 2 duo E6300 . Once again, the profit of performances between Yonah (Core duo T2500) and Merom (Core 2 duo T7200) are quite large: it takes 18 seconds for the last INTEL processor to encod our WAVE files .

Sandra 2007 - SP1 - cpu Test

Once is not habit, we finish our pages of performances with a synthetic test Sandra 2007. Sandra gives her favours to Core 2 duo T7200, Merom, but Core 2 duo E6300, our desktop processor , is really not far! the new INTEL model vs Core duo T2500 (Yonah) also known under the name Merom , is 26 % more powerful!

Sandra 2007 - SP1 - memory Test

we finishes with the test report of Sandra who measures the effective memory bandwidth. Our Core 2 duo e6300 is here in the head , with DDR2 667 the notebook system which, using all the same memory posts here performances identical result .

Power Consumption

Our Merom test would not be complete without the power consumption of the new processor. We took here a reading of consumption of the two portables Asus, the A8JA with its Core Duo T2500 and the A8JP with its Core 2 duo E7200. Measurement was in full Torture Test ,

Asus A8JA - INTEL Core duo T2500 2 GHz (Yonah) 70 Watts

Asus A8JP - INTEL Core 2 duo E7200 2 GHz (Merom) 75 Watts

It is seen, at equal frequency, Merom seems to consume a little more than his predecessor. we used BatteryMark after truck load of the batteries and by taking care to use the utility Asus Power4Gear. This last optimizes the power consumption of the machine (luminosity screen, performances CPU, etc.) according to the load remaining battery.

power consumption and battery life Intel core Duo T2500 vs e6300 t2600 t7200

Note that we took care to install Windows patchs relating to the problems of energy and deactivation related to the USB. To be honest , we should also recall that the flagstone equipping portable A8JP is different from the A8JA with a higher resolution what can conduct to power overconsumption.

Conclusion

Less than nine months after launching the Core duo and the platform Centrino duo, the arrival of Core 2 duo, Merom, does not revolutionize clearly the small world of portable computers. It should be said that contrary to their desktop equivalents , the portable processors of INTEL are since Pentium M particularly convincing. The variation of performances between Core duo and Core 2 duo is much less impressive than peak which separates Pentium D from desktop Core 2 duo. Count about 10 % performances in more for Core 2 duo at equal frequency vsto Core Duo.

Then why INTEL give a successor to a processor which does not need any urgent update? Perhaps to prepare the ground for the arrival of Windows Vista... Because one of the major arguments of INTEL with their Core 2 duo for portables is the management of the 64 bits instructions , thing which made until now defect for Intel mobile chips . INTEL at the beginning of 2007 will come with Santa-Rosa, its new mobile platform.

With regard to the A8JP Asus, we can without doubt affirm that the manufacturer signs a very homogeneous machine. . Asus havie selected Radeon Mobility X1700 for the graphic part, we could compare this last with Radeon Mobility X1600. Surprised: that the performances of the two chips being identical. .