Core 2 Duo vs. Dual Core

hiii frnz....
today there r no of processors in the comp industry...i myself find the diff btw each of them very confusing,so in this post i hv tried to mark the diff btw above mentioned processors...
comments are most welcome...

Core 2 Duo is a brand name by Intel - Dual-Core is a generic description meaning two separate physical cores in one chip package.

Dual core is simply a generic term referring to any processor package with two physical CPUs in one. The Pentium D, Core Duo, Core 2 Duo and Athlon X2 are all current CPUs that have dual cores in one package.

The Pentium D is simply two Pentium 4 Prescott cpus inefficiently paired together and ran as dual core.

The Core Duo is Intel's first generation dual core processor based upon the Pentium M (a Pentium III-4 hybrid) made mostly for laptops (though a few motherboard manufacturers have released desktop boards supporting the Core Duo CPU), and is much more efficiently than Pentium D.

The Core 2 Duo is Intel's second generation (hence, Core 2) processor made for desktops and laptops designed from the ground up to be fast while not consuming nearly as much power as previous CPUs.


Note - Intel has dropped the Pentium name in favor of the Core architecture as Intel is restructuring and refocusing it's efforts to become number one again (and are doing a fine job, might I add).

The AMD Athlon X2 CPUs have two revisions, the first one is essentially very similiar to the Pentium Ds in that they are simply two Athlon 64 chips fused together, making power requirements quite steep (around 89 watts). The second revision is made more efficiently, like the Core Duos, with much less power consumption (around 65 watts).


There are, of course, other differences, but that is the gist of dual cores as it relates to Intel and AMD.
____________




Note that there are different Core 2 Duos, too. There is an extreme one, too, but that just may mean it's hyperthreadable and not too much of an advantage (or possibly a disadvantage) in Seticrunching.


Actually, the Core 2 Extremes do not have HT and it's unsure whether Intel will keep using this or not.


The only difference between a Core 2 Duo and a Core 2 Extreme is that the Core 2 Duo's have a locked multiplier and the Core 2 Extreme's have a range of multipliers, which seems to be the first time Intel is encouraging overclocking since the original Pentium Classic days.
The new Conroe/Core duo ect have got me a bit confused. Can someone tell me which would be faster. Comparing to almost identically priced chips.

both about £110;
Pentium D 945 -- (3.4Ghz FSB;800 2Mb)
Core Duo E6300 -- (1.86Ghz FSB;1066 2Mb)

How do these compare to each other?

What speed chip (Core Duo) would you need to get to get similar or better performance (not just for seti ect) than standard Pentium D's at about 3-3.4Ghz? I know you can get faster and cheaper D's but then their too slow or too expensive really.




According to user reports, a Core 2 Duo E6600 (2.66GHz, 1066MHz FSB) is much faster than a Pentium D running at about 3.4GHz due to it's ability to process more Instructions Per Second (IPC) and it's shorter pipeline (doesn't take as many stages to decode the same instruction) and it's more efficient L2 cache. Not to mention it consumes LOTS less power than a Pentium D at a higher clock speed.

Comparitively, the E6300 should be about as fast as a Pentium D 3GHz (roughly).

Basically, if you're looking to build a new system and have decent budget, go for the Core 2 Duo (Conroe). You'll be happy that you did.