Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Core Duo vs. Intel Core i3/i5 with just 2 cores

Last response: in Laptops & Notebooks
Share
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
February 1, 2010 6:04:18 PM

Hi. If the lower-end i3 & i5 have only 2 cores, and the cache & Ghz is the same as the Core Duo - then why should I buy them?
Please email me yalith13@hotmail.com
February 1, 2010 6:39:44 PM

you should buy them because they're new architecture, faster, produces less heat, overclockability, and with socket 1156 you have the chance to upgrade to a better CPU in the future, socket 775 is EOL. btw the i3 530 is the best bang for buck for i3/i5 duals, its cheaper than the core 2 duo e8400 so its a no brainer, buy the i3 530 :) 
m
0
l
March 5, 2010 9:50:11 PM

Hi Der. Thanks for your reply. Unfortunately I already bought a dell vostro 1220 with P8700 :(  so no i3/i5/i7 for me for quite some time....ah well. I'm not an intensive user anyway. Just email, documents, maybe SPSS or sumthing so..Thanks very much again!
m
0
l
Related resources
a b D Laptop
March 5, 2010 9:55:13 PM

Keironne said:
Hi Der. Thanks for your reply. Unfortunately I already bought a dell vostro 1220 with P8700 :(  so no i3/i5/i7 for me for quite some time....ah well. I'm not an intensive user anyway. Just email, documents, maybe SPSS or sumthing so..Thanks very much again!


Shouldn't matter. The P8700 you have is fine for what you do.
m
0
l
March 6, 2010 3:17:13 AM

Based on your needs, the only reason to get the i3 or i5 would be if the price was the same or lower. Hope you enjoy your Dell. :) 
m
0
l
March 20, 2010 6:29:46 PM

as der said:-
1- newer architecture, so is better clock-for-clock
2- 32 nm, not 45 nm process, so it:-
- uses less power
- so less heat generates
- so more performance
- so less cooling is required
- so less annoying high-speed fan.
3- 32 nm is cheaper to manufacture than 45 nm, so for the same price u get a higher-class chip than before, as the manufacturing cost decreases.
m
0
l
March 20, 2010 6:35:53 PM

frankie_b said:
Intel Core i3 530 - 2.93GHz - 512KB L2 - 4MB L3

vs.

Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 - 3.00GHz - 6MB L2

hxxp://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=56&p2=118

(change hxxp in the url)


With this, it shows that the Core i5-530 is AT LEAST equal to, if not better than, the Core 2 Duo E8400, even though the E8400 is clocked higher and has alot more cache.

Also, remember - the 530 is the mid-level chip of its generation, while the 8400 was the top-end of its generation.
Also, individually the 530 costs USD 120 while the 8400 costs USD 168.

And the 8400 is probably cheaper now than a few months ago before the new generation was released.

Any doubts left about the new generation, gentlemen? ;) 
m
0
l
March 22, 2010 6:02:08 AM

Well, if you're looking for a deal, a lot of retailers are trying to get rid of their core 2 duo laptops to make way for the new core series. As such, you can score some pretty good deals if you're willing to give up hyperthreading and turboboost (on i5s and i7s).
m
0
l
March 22, 2010 10:06:05 AM

For me it makes no sense, I already have an Intel P45 / E8400 CPU overclocked @ 4.0GHz, in gaming the E8400 outperforms an i3 530 hands down and gaming is my main pastime. My next logical upgrade would be an i7 940 (Bloomfield) /X58 / triple channel DDR3 RAM, and that's a whole lot of cash outlay. No disrespect to the i3 530, they overclock to 4.2GHz, fine for a first build but not as an upgrade to an E8400 in my opinion.
m
0
l
March 22, 2010 10:20:34 AM

I agree with you, frankie_b; the OP's question is:-

Hi. If the lower-end i3 & i5 have only 2 cores, and the cache & Ghz is the same as the Core Duo - then why should I buy them?

And we've listed reasons why he should buy a Dual-Core Core i3 or i5 instead of a Core 2 Duo.



If anyone has a Core 2 Duo 8X00 Series processor, a Quad-Core Core i7 9X0 is what i, and im sure many others, would advise as the next step.

And yup, i agree with you; Next step is core i7, and it is a shitload of $$$$$.

I'll hopefully join that club late this summer or early 2011, but we'll see whats the best then... i think the ATI 900 series will be out then...
or maybe the AMD hexacore, not the quad-core Bloomfields?

meh, w/e... when the time comes. ;) 
m
0
l
September 23, 2011 5:42:28 AM

old i5 sucks, new i5 is much better, and in six months they'll be out of date any way then the new gen will be killer, ect. Any way you look at it, ur wasting money. platform X58 (1366) and 1156 biggest waste of cash ever. no future proofing there, 775 longest platform ever but its dead now. any one that reads this and can't decide weather or not to upgrade from the 775 wait till 2nd or 3d quarter 2012. if you must buy new right now i5 2500k with z68 motherboard. if you can wait ivy bridge, bulldozer, ect or next year. Done.
m
0
l
November 2, 2011 7:13:19 PM

seerwan said:
as der said:-
1- newer architecture, so is better clock-for-clock
2- 32 nm, not 45 nm process, so it:-
- uses less power
- so less heat generates
- so more performance
- so less cooling is required
- so less annoying high-speed fan.
3- 32 nm is cheaper to manufacture than 45 nm, so for the same price u get a higher-class chip than before, as the manufacturing cost decreases.



hey yar wots dis 32nm n 45nm prosess
m
0
l
!