Slashdot Mirror


Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 Sample Preview

MojoKid writes "Intel took the wraps off a new Core 2 Duo desktop chip today, dubbed the E6750. Though this chip shares the same basic clock speed as the Core 2 Duo E6700 at 2.66GHz, this new processor also runs on a faster 1,333MHz Front Side Bus. The new chip's additional bus bandwidth affords it up to a 5% performance advantage over standard 1066MHz FSB-based Core 2 chips. However, what's perhaps more promising is this new chip's overclocking head-room of up to 3.92GH and beyond on standard air cooling."

25 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. All on one page by edgr · · Score: 5, Informative

    The link to the article all on one page is http://www.hothardware.com/printarticle.aspx?artic leid=989

    1. Re:All on one page by muszek · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you knew how much effort they put into creating those cute 11 pages, you wouldn't have rushed to destroy everything.

  2. Good marketing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why not just sell them rated at a higher clock speed? It would be funny to think they made a fast chip and purposefully rated it at a lower speed to grab some of the extra hobbiest market while simultaneously cutting down on support calls from overclockers who cause system instability by making the overclockers think they are overclocking. :)

    1. Re:Good marketing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Overclocking raise the heat and power consumption, and the most important, it lower the lifetime of the CPU. Intel have to guarantee that chips work a certain amount of years, this is not so important in the desktop world, but in the server space it is very important.

    2. Re:Good marketing? by jawtheshark · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, it's all market related... but not how you think.

      There is no such thing as a xyz GHz chip. They are all the same (except for caches on chip and so, but let's neglect that) The chips are all made from the same wafers and then are tested: those that are tested at high speeds and work, get sold als "high speed chips", the chips that fail are tested at lower speed and then, if they work, sold for that speed.

      Now, that's fine in theory, the problem is that when the yields of high speed chips are very high. At that point Intel has a problem: their high-premium chips are plentiful and hence they should sell them at lower cost. Especially that they don't have lower speed chips that are for the middle and low-segment market. But wait! Why not just sell the chips that work at high speeds, but tell the customer that they are slower speed chips. The (average) customer will not test if it runs higher speeds, and frankly, it is not in their interest to do because they would lose warranty.

      That's what really happens...

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    3. Re:Good marketing? by level_headed_midwest · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes and no. You are correct in that a two-platter 250 GB drive and a two-platter 320 GB drive likely use the same platters, with the 250 GB unit being "locked." But the hard drive manufacturer can and does vary the number of platters for differing capacities as well as putting in a different motor for different speeds. Intel generally has one set of dies for all of a certain arch of chip- the Core Duo, Core Solo, Pentium Dual Core, and Celeron M 400 series are made from the same mask. Even the Core 2 Duos are generally all made from one mask, with a handful of Merom-2Ms and Allendales being made from the smaller 111 mm^2 mask rather than the 140 mm^2 one for 4 MB L2 cache.

      --
      Just "gittin-r-done," day after day.
  3. what... by cosmocain · · Score: 2, Funny

    ....a coincidence: the overclocking article is from ->hothardware. yeah. i truly believe, that an ordinary aircooling and a C2D at 3.92GHz have really earned an article on a domain called like that.

  4. Reviews of samples should stop talking about... by heyguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    overclockability. I believe those chips sent out for review are cherry picked by intel. Most of the reviews for the Core 2 Duo chips last year said the lower end chips could easily be overclocked to 3.5ghz+. That ended up not being the norm. I think something around 3ghz is pretty standard.

  5. Megahertz myth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought we had finally put the "megahertz myth" behind us. But no, here we are again cheering on Intel for producing chips with their many megahertzes and gigahertzes.

    We should lean on them to use a more sensible naming convention. AMD has led the way in this area. Consumers are much better served with descriptive product names such as, for example, "Turion 64 X2 TL56", rather than some arbitrary clock speed designations.

    1. Re:Megahertz myth by jawtheshark · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Descriptive product names? You know what "Turion 64 X2 TL56" means? I don't.... That said, I don't know what "Core 2 Duo E6600" means either. Is a "Turion TL60" better than a "Turion TL56"? Or a "Core 2 Duo E6800" better than a "Core 2 Duo E6600"? Heck, it's like with graphic cards: you cannot say squat based on the names of graphics cards. It's all dust and mirrors.

      For the bad car analogy: is a BMW 318 better than a BMW 320? You're gonna say the BMW 320 is better, evidently! I might argue that the BMW 318 I was talking about is full option and that the BMW 320 doesn't even have power windows.

      Yeah, yeah, I know you're kidding... but really: the chip names of all manufacturers are pretty much a joke.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    2. Re:Megahertz myth by OverlordQ · · Score: 2, Informative

      You know what "Turion 64 X2 TL56" means?

      Turion - Series
      64 - 64-bit CPU
      X2 - Dual-Core
      TL - Taylor Core
      56 - Dunno.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    3. Re:Megahertz myth by clickclickdrone · · Score: 4, Funny

      >56 - Dunno.
      That's the percentage of performance compared to the Intel equivelent i.e the Turion is 56% the speed of an Intel equivelent.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    4. Re:Megahertz myth by clickclickdrone · · Score: 2, Funny

      How do you define "whoosh"?

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  6. WHOA *jaw drops* by Tama00 · · Score: 2, Funny

    This is like sex, except im having it!

  7. Stability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Great, so it's bloody fast. But can it complete 10+ hours of Prime95 and 32M digits of SuperPI without any errors? Simply booting and running a few benchmarks is hardly a means of stability testing.

  8. "Up to 5%..." by Flying+pig · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Pay more for memory, reduce the error margin on the motherboard, all for a virtually unnoticeable improvement in performance. Someone is trying to cash in to pay for the development of versions that will consistently run at higher clock speeds. The processor companies are getting like the drug companies - hyping things that work hardly any better than the one before, and then seeking to profit from early adopters.

    Now what I would like to see advertised - but won't - is slower but highly reliable motherboards, processors and memory at commercial prices. How about a Core Duo Reliability Edition? I would reallyt like to be able to build a server and a few desktops from commodity hardware and almost be able to forget about them for 5 years. I can get HDDs that will do that, but where can I get the commodity silicon where the manufacturer will make a statement about long term reliability?

    --
    Pining for the fjords
    1. Re:"Up to 5%..." by cowbutt · · Score: 2, Informative
      Now what I would like to see advertised - but won't - is slower but highly reliable motherboards, processors and memory at commercial prices. How about a Core Duo Reliability Edition? I would reallyt like to be able to build a server and a few desktops from commodity hardware and almost be able to forget about them for 5 years.

      Er, that's exactly why I stick with Intel CPUs on quality motherboards (Gigabyte/ASUS) that use Intel chipsets and Crucial memory, despite the taunting of my AMD fanboy friends. Also, pay attention to your cooling and PSU (i.e. fit as many fans as you physically can fit in the case, and don't use the cheapest case/PSU combination you can find), as cutting corners here will severely impact your reliability. I'm not interested in overclocking, either. My oldest self-built Intel machine is 9 years old this summer and being used as a desktop by my dad. I also have a 5 year old Celeron machine that's on 24/7 as my MythTV box and firewall.

      I know it's possible to build reliable AMD-based systems, but it seems to be harder work, and probably involves going with an Opteron on a Tyan or Supermicro board in order to be able to use an AMD chipset, rather than one of the third-party (e.g. VIA, SiS, ALI) chipsets.

      Electrolytic capacitor reliability has been a problem throughout the electronics industry for the last 10 years or so, but even that should be less of a problem shortly. Gigabyte, for one, are introducing all-solid capacitor boards to eliminate this weak link in the chain.

    2. Re:"Up to 5%..." by niko9 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The company your are looking for is Tyan. http://www.tyan.com/ Their workstation and server boards are some of the most reliable around, i.e., for people in the know. You don't hear much about them from "mainstream" review sites because the boards lack l33t OC'ing features and super cool LED lit fans. Take a look at their workstation boards, they make a great desktop board alternative. Available for AMD and Intel CPU's.

      I have had zero issues with any series of boards I have used from them, and all of them with Linux no less.

  9. What I would like to see in hardware reviews by LarsWestergren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do people still overclock? It is such a focus on this in online hardware reviews, but none of the people I know still do it, even the gamers. Power consumption, heat and noise is much more important to them. Low sample number to draw any significant conclusions from, I know, but still... Perhaps the market has moved on a bit?

    Also, whenever they do speed comparisons, I wish they would add in models from one and two years ago. I really don't care if a chip is 0,05% faster than its similarly priced competition, I want to know if it is a good time to upgrade my old computer.

    --

    Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

    1. Re:What I would like to see in hardware reviews by suv4x4 · · Score: 5, Interesting


      Do people still overclock? It is such a focus on this in online hardware reviews, but none of the people I know still do it, even the gamers. Power consumption, heat and noise is much more important to them. Low sample number to draw any significant conclusions from, I know, but still... Perhaps the market has moved on a bit?


      You're right, the hardware reviewers are getting out of date with their metrics.

      Overclocking a modern CPU gets you mostly nothing nowadays. Gamers can still be found overclocking their *graphics cards*, but overclocking their Core 2 Duo's wouldn't really change anything for them (and I'm sure we'll reach a point where messing with your graphics card will be just as unnecessary as it is today with CPU-s, just this industry is younger than generic cpu).

      I mean, on laptops one of the features is dynamically underclocking the CPU for less power usage. It's the kind of market we're in.

      Multi-cores are lucrative area for servers, where no CPU amount is enough, and less so for desktops.

      No wonder the companies are concentrating on features such as power usage: there's basically nothing else they can impress us with (and low power usage allows smaller more mobile devices with longer battery life etc.).

    2. Re:What I would like to see in hardware reviews by xouumalperxe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, the reason why overclocking the processor will do squat for a gamer's performance is because the bottleneck is on the graphics card. The day the graphics industry matures enough to be on par with the general purpose processor industry will not mean you won't get anything from overclocking the graphics card. Rather, it'll mean that you'll gain the most performance by overclocking both GPU and CPU (because neither is holding the other back). Of course, the question is "do you really need the extra performance?" -- I seriously doubt that games will hit a cap on the power they can harness from your box anytime soon. There's always higher res textures, more detailed models, more elaborate particle systems, etc to be had, especially if the support for physics cards doesn't really become a trend and nVidia/AMD manage to make the GPGPU thing happen.

  10. Re:Overclocking... by commlinx · · Score: 4, Informative

    Exactly, and why the chip is sold as 2.66GHz not the 3.92GHz that the marketing department would prefer. Semiconductor manufacturers do a stellar job of testing and specifying things over the complete operating range of the device. Ignoring obvious differences in things like ambient temperature and power supply fluctuations when you overclock a device you risk a number of factors for reliability. Any temperature measurement is always taken at a single point and if another point on the surface of the silicon is hotter, for example because your application of heatsink compound was not so great or it contains higher speed switching and more dense circuitry in that area you always run the risk of frying things. Not to mention there is a difference between running a game that might place peak demands on the CPU and allow it to cool versus compute-intensive applications where you might want to drive all cores at 100% over a long period. And they might be using a different section of the processor, and your CPU might be from a different batch, and...

  11. Xeon by AnimeDTA · · Score: 3, Informative

    Some models of Xeons run at 1066 and 1333. Just off the specs on the article I'd say they released those Xeon CPUs as desktop model on the LGA775 socket. The larger cache, higher bus speed, thermal design and Smart Cache match up to the Xeon E51xx and E53xx.

  12. Go ahead, OVERCLOCK to your harts content. by viking80 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Of course people overclock. instead of buying the 2.6GHz Core 2 Duo, you just buy the 1.8GHz version and pay half the money ($160 insted of $320).

    Now just overclock it back up to 2.6GHz.

    You may want to do a little 2 corner testing (Voltage and Temp), just to make sure you are within stable regime.

    As long as you dont overvoltage the chip, there is really no reason not to max out the clock rate. As soon as the CPU idles, it underclocks automatically anyway, so you get the boost only when you need it.

    If you do any home video decoding, the difference is huge.

    To make the point clear: You can burn out a power transistor if you run it too hard, but this is not possible on a CPU. It will hang long before it even gets close to be damaged. If the chip overheats and/or is driven at a too high clock, it just hangs. Reset and cool, and it is good as new.

    --
    don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
  13. Re:Hi there! Let me introduce... by Plutonite · · Score: 2, Funny

    When you are overclocking for 5% performance gains on synthetic benchmarks there is no time for commas.