Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Why upgrade from Core 2 ?

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 29, 2010 5:56:08 AM

Hello

Here are my specs:

Summary
Operating System
MS Windows XP Professional 32-bit SP3
CPU
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3.00GHz 45 °C
Wolfdale 45nm Technology
RAM
4.0GB Dual-Channel DDR2 @ 400MHz (6-6-6-18)
Motherboard
Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. EP35-DS3L (Socket 775)
Graphics
SyncMaster @ 1680x1050
512MB GeForce 8800 GT (XFX Pine Group) 60 °C
Hard Drives
488GB Western Digital WDC WD5000AAKS-00A7B0 (SATA) 43 °C
Optical Drives
HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GE20LU10 USB Device




I would like to know whats the difference between Core 2 Duo tech and the new Core i3, i5 and i7?

Why should one upgrade to these new CPUs ?

More about : upgrade core

a c 81 à CPUs
October 29, 2010 6:14:18 AM

If you are a gamer primarily, then you've no apparent reason to upgrade your CPU.. Better to upgrade your GPU in that case.. As for the difference between a core 2 CPU and an i series processor, they are totally different by architecture.. For a more deeper understanding, refer to this -

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core?wasRedirected...
October 29, 2010 6:17:07 AM

Emperus said:
If you are a gamer primarily, then you've no apparent reason to upgrade your CPU.. Better to upgrade your GPU in that case.. As for the difference between a core 2 CPU and an i series processor, they are totally different by architecture.. For a more deeper understanding, refer to this -

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core?wasRedirected...



Thanks for the link. I am more of a multitasker, rather than a gamer, i do play games but only occasionally. Not a hardcore gamer though.

So there is no reason for me to upgrade from my present setup to an i5 or i7 ?
Related resources
a c 81 à CPUs
October 29, 2010 6:39:00 AM

From a general multitasker's point of view, it is not necessary to upgrade from a core 2 to an i series.. If only your application usage involves some strenuous task(s) such as 3D modelling and designing, running 4+ virtual machines etc., the full scale platform upgrade makes some sense..
October 29, 2010 6:40:48 AM

Emperus said:
the full scale platform upgrade makes some sense..


i think this sums it up.

Thanks
October 29, 2010 6:44:20 AM

that would be depending on the kind of multitasking you do...
just normal office stuff or you are using some kind of professional programs?
are your programs designed for multitasking?
a c 343 à CPUs
October 29, 2010 4:08:19 PM

The i3, i5, i7 processors are generally faster by perhaps 10-15% on a clock for clock basis.

They will also have hyperthreading which gives you additional dispatchable tasks. These tasks use residual cycles from the main cores, and amount to the compute power of parhaps 1/3 of a full core.

The i3 & i5 clarkdale processors are dual core which can turbo up to near 4.0ghz in the i5-680.
the 32nm process makes them run cooler and quieter. They overclock very well.

If you are limited by individual processor speeds, or are running several cpu bound or multithreaded apps, then perhaps an upgrade is in order.

That said, the 32nm "sandy bridge" new generation of processors will launch about January. They will be an additional 10-15%
more effective. Unless your need is urgent, it will pay to wait.
October 29, 2010 6:40:58 PM

geofelt said:
The i3, i5, i7 processors are generally faster by perhaps 10-15% on a clock for clock basis.

They will also have hyperthreading which gives you additional dispatchable tasks. These tasks use residual cycles from the main cores, and amount to the compute power of parhaps 1/3 of a full core.

The i3 & i5 clarkdale processors are dual core which can turbo up to near 4.0ghz in the i5-680.
the 32nm process makes them run cooler and quieter. They overclock very well.

If you are limited by individual processor speeds, or are running several cpu bound or multithreaded apps, then perhaps an upgrade is in order.

That said, the 32nm "sandy bridge" new generation of processors will launch about January. They will be an additional 10-15%
more effective. Unless your need is urgent, it will pay to wait.



Thanks for the detailed reply.

I think i will wait till next year for Sandy Bridge, what about Ivy bridge, if i am correct, when will it launch ?
a b à CPUs
October 29, 2010 7:23:08 PM

Ibn Saeed said:
Thanks for the detailed reply.

I think i will wait till next year for Sandy Bridge, what about Ivy bridge, if i am correct, when will it launch ?


Games are starting to use more than 2 cores, though the trend is quite slow and most games would still work with a dual core. If you're not absolutely picky about performance, your current Core 2 would still probably work well enough until next year.

Waiting for Sandy Bridge or the next processors would probably be best for your scenario
October 29, 2010 7:26:19 PM

amnotanoobie said:
Games are starting to use more than 2 cores, though the trend is quite slow and most games would still work with a dual core. If you're not absolutely picky about performance, your current Core 2 would still probably work well enough until next year.

Waiting for Sandy Bridge or the next processors would probably be best for your scenario



I also think ill stick with the waiting route for now.

Thanks for all your help guys

Always a pleasure here at Toms Hardware
a c 343 à CPUs
October 29, 2010 8:42:35 PM

Ibn Saeed said:
Thanks for the detailed reply.

I think i will wait till next year for Sandy Bridge, what about Ivy bridge, if i am correct, when will it launch ?


ivy bridge is a die shrink of sandy bridge from 32 to 22nm. It should arrive in 2012.
a c 89 à CPUs
October 29, 2010 11:57:03 PM

your current cpu is still great for gaming, no need to upgrade.
!