Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Performance Comparison of Current Intel Core 2 CPUs

Posted by timothy on from the now-wait-a-few-months dept.

crazyeyes writes "Intel has way too many Core 2 processor models. No one really knows if it's worth paying $100 more for a Core 2 Quad, instead of a Core 2 Duo. And when tech websites start interjecting codenames like Wolfdale, Kentsfield and Yorkfield, you know the battle is lost. All we want is a simple guide on the REAL WORLD performance differences between the many Intel Core 2 processors. How do they perform in games like Crysis, 3D rendering software, video encoding software, etc.? Fortunately, there is such a guide — just simple comparisons of the relative performance of these CPUs."

2 of 73 comments (clear)

  1. Nvidia too? by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Someone needs to do the same for nvidia graphics cards...
    I went out and bought an 8600 card, only to find out later that a 7900 is actually faster (despite being lower model number and previous generation tech).

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  2. Product names too confusing by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is the list of the CPUs in the article:
    Core 2 Extreme QX9650
    Core 2 Quad Q9550
    Core 2 Quad Q9450
    Core 2 Duo E8500
    Core 2 Duo E8400
    Core 2 Duo E8300
    Core 2 Duo E8200/E8190
    Core 2 Extreme QX6850
    Core 2 Extreme QX6800
    Core 2 Extreme QX6700
    Core 2 Quad Q6700
    Core 2 Quad Q6600
    Core 2 Duo E6850
    Core 2 Duo E6750
    Core 2 Duo E6600
    Core 2 Duo E6550/E6540
    Core 2 Duo E6420
    Core 2 Duo E6320

    Seriously, someone in the marketing department needs a swift kick in the ass.