Intel Core 2 Duo vs Pentium Dual Core

Core 2 duo has a more advanced microarchitecture, so it would run faster.

Pentium dual core have the same microarchitecture actually. It's mostly just that the Core 2 Duos have more cache, and tend to have higher clock speeds.

Exactly, exact same except for cache, and cach only makes 2-5% difference. Core 2 like higer FSB, but seems like the pentiums have the bigger multipliers, so both OC extremly well.

hmm that's a good topic.

for example lets see, what the diff between this one other than the price

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

and also keep in mind that core 2 duo is much faster than the Dual Core even though they both have the same sepcs.

It also depends on which "pentium dual cores" we're talking about. The P4 8xx and 9xx are based off the old netbust arch, and would be slower. The newer pentiums are based of the same arch as the C2D line, and would be ever so slightly slower due to the lower cache/FSB. Between these two, the C2D should be faster, within reason of course.

that dont give us a reason on why on these 2 links any should be faster than the other, becaouse they both use the same methods, unless there is something els

No, it isn't much faster. It's a bit faster (~5%-10% at best). The current "Pentium Dual Core" CPUs are different from the old Pentium D, which ran hot and was nowhere near as fast as a core 2 duo. The reason the pentium in your link is slower is because of the cache though - the one linked here has 2MB cache, vs 3MB for the Core. Other than that, they are identical, which is why there isn't a whole lot of difference.

? Netbust had horrible IPC, so even if it was clocked at the same frequency as a C2D based chip, it would be "slower". There is more to a chip then just L2 cache and FSB.

Agreed. Reading over my last post, it's a bit unclear, but when I say Pentium in that final statement, I'm referring to the pentium dual core in the newegg link (which is the same die as a Core 2, but with 1MB less cache).

ok i viewed some benchmarks about those 2 cpus,

there is actually just a little-bit of extra performance for the E7400 over the E6300, and that is not even noticeable.

the E7400 is a little faster Maybe by 5%, is because it have more Cache, just 1 extra mg

but keep in mind that E7400 lacks of IV (Intel virtualisation) thats all.

as in for differences between Dual core vs Core 2 duo, it all depends on which ones your getting, as in some Dual cores are faster than Core 2 duo,

because they both have 2 cores
they both don't have hyper threading
alot of them have the same FSB
they both use intel 64

so basically alot of them are in common, it all matters on which one you chose as there is no real difference between them both.

hope that helps.

The virtualization is the only possible deal-breaker for some, as it is required for XP mode on Win 7. Though I doubt many of us would really need the XP mode, it may be a nice feature to have just in case.

If your budget doesn't allow it, there is nothing wrong with a Pentium Dual-Core (not Pentium D). The speed difference with day-to-day tasks and gaming aren't actually noticeable. This would probably matter though with video encoding, the small 5 second differences in benchmarks may relfect as minutes when you're encoding a few hours of video.

If you working with video you should be on a quad, preferably a i7.

But of course you can't count out those who can't even afford to buy even a branded psu.

Thanks for your replies everyone, I was just wondering as I'm getting rid of my present laptop that runs a dual core pentium. I'm going to get a much more powerful core 2 duo in my new one. Thanks!

P.S: Just for the record, I do have a quad, in my desktop, and an i7 mobo so I think im set for video encoding