Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
952 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
SO whats the difference between a Core 2 Duo and a Dual Core Proc.?

For instance, my proc is a dual core processor, but its not the new core 2 duo...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
926 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by someone153
View Post

C2D (Core 2 Duo) run more ops per cycle then normal Intels. They run 12 and normals run 6.

I really wish people would stop saying this. It's not proven at all. Plus it is much more complicated than just that. Added sse instructions, pipeline stages are all different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,783 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by triggerc
View Post

I really wish people would stop saying this. It's not proven at all. Plus it is much more complicated than just that. Added sse instructions, pipeline stages are all different.

Can anyone give me the easy to understand version of what the difference is. People ask me a lot too and I give the same reply someone did. For someone who knows a little about what makes a cpu. How could we explain the difference to them the best?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,838 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by triggerc
View Post

I really wish people would stop saying this. It's not proven at all. Plus it is much more complicated than just that. Added sse instructions, pipeline stages are all different.

Well it is somewhere around there anyways so i'm still gonna say it beacuse I know its better and you know its better too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,298 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by triggerc
View Post

I really wish people would stop saying this. It's not proven at all. Plus it is much more complicated than just that. Added sse instructions, pipeline stages are all different.

and where do you think "we" got it from, you make it sound like you know different if so why dont you set us straight then i go by

Quote:


Unlike NetBurst-based processors, such as the Pentium 4 and Pentium D, Core 2 does not stress designs based on extremely high clock speeds but rather improvements on other CPU features, including cache efficiency and number of cores. The power consumption of these processors is much lower than the Pentium desktop line of products. With a TDP of only 65 W, Core 2 features a significantly reduced power consumption compared to its predecessor desktop chip, the Pentium 4 Prescott with a TDP of 130 W.

source
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,976 Posts
Core 2 Duo and Dual core are the same thing...

Dual Core Processors:

intel Core 2 Duo, Xeon

AMD X2, Opteron

They're both the same thing. The difference is the actual architecture of the chips themselves that makes them different.

Dual Core is having two Processors on one chip.

Core 2 Duo is the type of processor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,783 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by lightsource
View Post

Core 2 Duo and Dual core are the same thing...

Dual Core Processors:

intel Core 2 Duo, Xeon

AMD X2, Opteron

They're both the same thing. The difference is the actual architecture of the chips themselves that makes them different.

Dual Core is having two Processors on one chip.

Core 2 Duo is the type of processor.

Which leaves the OP still saying.

"SO whats the difference between a Core 2 Duo and a Dual Core Proc.?

For instance, my proc is a dual core processor, but its not the new core 2 duo..."

But yes, they are both dual core processors. I'm assuming we all know that.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,282 Posts
It has a new architecture that operates much faster than the original core duo. If you want much more detail than that, get a degree in computer engineering and head over to Intel for answers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
952 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Quote:


Originally Posted by rabidgnome229
View Post

It has a new architecture that operates much faster than the original core duo. If you want much more detail than that, get a degree in computer engineering and head over to Intel for answers


Ok, I'll see you guys later.... :: Heads over to Intel::
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,783 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by rabidgnome229
View Post

It has a new architecture that operates much faster than the original core duo. If you want much more detail than that, get a degree in computer engineering and head over to Intel for answers

I know. I was just pointing out that lightsource didn't really answer the op's question.

If anything I blame intel for all of this confusion. With so many dual core processors out there. Why did they decided to name one core 2 duo? That's just asking for people to be confused.

Conversations I have usually go like this. Oh so what processor did you put into your computer?

Reply: E6600 Core 2 duo processor

Random person: What's that?

Reply: 2.4 dual core processor

Random person: Oh I have a 3.6 dual core
pwn'd!

Reply: .....

Random person: Since we have the same graphic card.. why is your fps higher than mines?

I blame intel...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
787 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by CrazyHeaven
View Post

I know. I was just pointing out that lightsource didn't really answer the op's question.

If anything I blame intel for all of this confusion. With so many dual core processors out there. Why did they decided to name one core 2 duo? That's just asking for people to be confused.

Conversations I have usually go like this. Oh so what processor did you put into your computer?

Reply: E6600 Core 2 duo processor

Random person: What's that?

Reply: 2.4 dual core processor

Random person: Oh I have a 3.6 dual core
pwn'd!

Reply: .....

Random person: Since we have the same graphic card.. why is your fps higher than mines?

I blame intel...

I loled.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
926 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by noshibby
View Post

and where do you think "we" got it from, you make it sound like you know different if so why dont you set us straight

In fact I do know better than 6 vs 12 op/cycle or whatever people say. The core architecture employs 14 stage pipeline, consuming less power, and a 4-issue wide execution unit instead of the 3-issue wide of netburst. Meaning with the 4 issue wide execution unit it can perform an sse operation in one cycle instead of taking two cycles in the old architecture. And that is just the tip of the iceberg. the new architecture results in a more efficient design with less power consumption and huge performance gain with sse.

Now i have never seen from any credible source that the core architecture does specifically 12 op/cycle and that netburst does 6. If you can provide me with proof of that i will believe it.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,696 Posts
Quote:


The core architecture employs 14 stage pipeline, consuming less power, and a 4-issue wide execution unit instead of the 3-issue wide of netburst. Meaning with the 4 issue wide execution unit it can perform an sse operation in one cycle instead of taking two cycles in the old architecture.

The addition of the four stage lane execution unit does not allow a single SIMD level instruction to be processed within a single cycle. The ability for this procedure to be accomplished is because the SIMD runtime system has been extended from 64 bit length (Integer/Multi-Media) to 128. SIMD level instructions (SSE-SSSE3+) are themselves 128 bit in length, therefore Core 2 Duo is capable of executing a single SIMD level instruction in a single cycle.

Quote:


Now i have never seen from any credible source that the core architecture does specifically 12 op/cycle and that netburst does 6. If you can provide me with proof of that i will believe it.

An integer, or value, can never be derived for the operations performed per cycle on processors. Depending on the task at hand the operation count will fluctuate. Therefore an average can not be determined, as an average in this case acts must act as a constant. However due to constant fluctuation a variable value will be obtained, that could never act as a constant, and therefore never an average.

However there are technically 12 available direct logic processing units


As for the 14 stage pipeline for Core 2 Duo I like and I don't like it.

Micro-Instruction Pipeline (14) - [Core 2 Duo, Core Micro-Architecture)
Microbranch Prediction (1)
Microinstruction Fetch (1)
Drive (1)
Allocation (1)
Register Rename (1)
Load Instruction Queue (1)
Schedule (2)
Dispatch (1)
Register File Read (1)
Execute (1)
Calculate Flags (1)
Retirement (1)
Drive (1)

Not enough stages for my liking, a bit too short so there is little room for decoding. Still it works well and allows decent clock speed to be obtained.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,282 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by The_Manual
View Post

An integer, or value, can never be derived for the operations performed per cycle on processors. Depending on the task at hand the operation count will fluctuate. Therefore an average can not be determined, as an average in this case acts must act as a constant. However due to constant fluctuation a variable value will be obtained, that could never act as a constant, and therefore never an average.

I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about here. Just because something is a variable doesn't mean that it can't have an average value - that's what an average is. It is the arithmetic mean (usually) of all values that a variable holds over a given period.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,696 Posts
An average is a constant. It does not change with given values in a set time period.

Say we have 10, 20, and 30. What’s the average of those integers? The answer to that question is 20.

The average we wish to derive at can not be determined as you can calculating millions, or billions, of averages per second to come up with a form of value for the total average.
However what you are accomplishing every nanosecond (computer measurements 1x10-9) is totally different to what you will do several cycles later. The averages will be so spread apart and will be derived at too fast that it is impossible to derive an average.

Example:

Cycle 1: Two operations. Advanced x86 decoding, complex
Cycle 2: Eleven operations. Simple x86 multimedia decoding, all lanes.

Total number of cycles: 3.21x10^9.

There are too many values with different spacing that an average will never remain constant. It will change due to fluctuation.

Anti-Example:

Computer boot up - Computer shutdown 1: 11ops
Computer boot up - Computer shutdown 2: 4ops
Computer boot up - Computer shutdown 3: 8ops
Computer boot up - Computer shutdown 4: 12ops
Computer boot up - Computer shutdown 5: 1ops
Computer boot up - Computer shutdown 6: 6ops

Average: 11+4+8+12+1+6/6 = 7ops.

As I have only taking a few values you can determine an average here. As soon as you go beyond this simple level the ability to calculate an average fails completely


As you can see 12ops will very rarely occur. Even though there are 12 units
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,282 Posts
If you take a large enough sample (even one second's worth of data) you will get an average which will approximately equal (very closely) any average that you will get with any kind of reasonable data set.

While the average will not be equal to every data sample (obviously) it is an average that tells you much more about the CPU's capabilities than saying that it has 12 units.

Saying that changing data makes an average useless is ludicrous. That's the purpose of an average - to allow you to view a set of varied data without the need to deal with each individual case.
I have no idea where you're coming from - of course individual data will vary from the mean - that's why its the mean and not the only possible value
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
357 Posts
If the 12op feature is more or less theoretical, then why IS the core2duo so much faster?

Another question which I have - I heard that a rough ratio between the Core2Duo to the Pentium D's clock speed is 1:2. Meaning, an E6300 is about the same as a Pentium D 3.7GHz. If this is true, then why at a clockrate of 3.8 I get, in some benchmarks, a much lower score than any C2D? In other scores I do get the results of an E6300.

The benchmarks in which my results are low are these:
1. Processor multimedia(sandra) - I get like 1/2 of an E6300 on the Integer SSE4 part. Is this because the P-D doens't have SSE4?
2.CPU Photoworkxx(Everest) - a much lower score. Even much lower than an AMD Athlox XP x2 4400+.
3. SuperPI - This is the most significant test. I'm getting 37secs, while a simple E6300 will do under 30. probably like 25.

If I am supposedly at the level of an E6300 - how come in some tests I am far far behind that processor? Is this only in syntethic benchmarks?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,095 Posts
core 2 duo is the name of the processor...

Like yours is a pentium D....Core 2 Duo is the NAME.

It's faster per clock.. (kinda like AMD used to be)...and it's got a huge L2 cache.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top