Even though many people’s computers now have LGA1156 processors, the good old LGA775 socket is not going to give up just yet. Of course, these processors can’t compete with Core i5 and i7, which are at the top of the market, so they don’t have any use there. But it only makes up a small part of Intel’s sales, and there are no alternatives to the “old” Core 2 Duo and newer Core 2 Quad models in the bigger markets.
The dual-core Core i3/i5 and Pentium won’t hit the market until January. Then it will take a while for these models to be sold out everywhere, and it will take even longer for cheap motherboards to become popular (they already exist in theory, but for the past six months, manufacturers have been focusing on high-end models, which makes sense).
Yes, and many people don’t like to cling to new products because they might get burned. Instead, they like simple solutions that have stood the test of time. Also, many users already have systems with LGA775 processors, so the idea of a “little blood upgrade” is more appealing to them than the idea of a whole new platform. So, even though these processors aren’t interesting for research anymore, they still need to be tested. At least to compare it fully with what was expected. We still need to test these processors, even if they are no longer interesting for research. At least to compare it fully with what was expected. We still need to test these processors, even if they are no longer interesting for research. At least to compare it fully with what was expected.
The last time we talked about Core 2 Quad was at the end of August, and some Core 2 Duo and Pentium chips were tested in the middle of October. Some, but not all. In particular, we couldn’t get the E8600, which is the most advanced C2D. The Pentium line was also updated when the Pentium E6500 came out. It was close to 3 GHz, a speed that was once only available to overclockers or people who bought extreme processors (for example, Core 2 Extreme X6800differed from our hero only in the technical process, TDP and cache capacity). The Pentium E6600, which is due out in the first quarter of next year, will generally be better than this line. It seems that this will be the end of the line’s development. In the same way that the E7600 and E8600 (with a 90% chance that it was the former, not the latter) ended their lines.
Even though it is a step back, the Core 2 Quad line has also been updated. On the other hand, the C2Q Q9505 might soon stop being the fastest in the family. This is because more productive models have a 12 MB L2 cache, which is very expensive to make, but they lose to the Core i5 750, which is more technologically advanced. Clearly, not the residents. The new processor should probably be called the Q9500, but the company chose a more creative name to emphasize that the only difference between it and the Q9550, which has been out for a long time, is that the new one has less cache memory. Well, yes, but at a cost. So today, in fact, we have the “swan song” of processors under LGA775: a test of the best.
In general, everything has already been said about the main characters. Together with the Core 2 Duo E7600 tested last time (which we decided to include among the main characters), these are the best of their respective families. Someone has been here before, someone will be there after, and most processors will be forgotten.
There were also no problems with choosing the processors to compare. Q9550, which is the closest match to Q955, could not help but get in. The Q8200 is the cheapest Intel quad-core processor, so we couldn’t ignore it. And finally, the Core i5 750 looks like it’s “out of competition” (but it’s not, because its price is similar to that of some competitors), but it’s a good “upper bar” because it lets you know right away if it makes sense to stick with the old platform or if it’s time to move on.
AMD also has three “guests from the camp” today. Intel’s “family” turned out to be very different, so we decided not to pick competitors based on price and other factors, but instead to stick with well-studied members of the Athlon II budget family: the X2 250, X3 435, and X4 630, which are also odd “tops” rulers. The first two lines are meant to keep people from buying Celeron, Pentium, or the newer Core 2 Duo. The third line, on the other hand, is very strange: it has the cheapest quad-core processors that don’t have any direct equivalents in the Intel range. But no one bothers us to compare all the named processors, so we will do it. It would be possible to add to this group various “Phenomas”, fortunately, even the oldest model of this family (Phenom II X4 965), after the last price reduction, turned out to be a competitor to the “semi-budget” Q9505, but we will not do this in order not to increase the charts to an absolutely indecent form. The traditional way to show all the results is in a table, but for those who prefer the traditional way of showing information in a graph, we will make a matching gift (certainly not later than the “old” New Year) without any comments.
Even though the computer industry is moving toward DDR3, and for some DDR2 processors it is already physically impossible to use, we decided to take a step back this time and test the Core 2 Quad Q9505 along with DDR2. We didn’t test the Q9550 with DDR3, but we need to compare these processors under the same conditions as much as possible (and the Q9300, which is a kind of benchmark for the current version of the technique, was previously tested only in conjunction with DDR2). Along the way, we will also look at another interesting question: how different types of memory affect the speed of real-world applications. The most interesting thing about this is the FSB 1333 frequency. Since DDR2 stopped at a slightly lower level, DDR3 has a slight bandwidth advantage. Because it can’t be put into action,
In the article, the testing method (list of software used and testing conditions) is explained in detail. The results on the diagrams are shown in percent so that they are easier to understand (the result of Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 in each of the tests is taken as 100 percent ). There is a table in Microsoft Excel format that shows the results in absolute values.
Quad-core processors don’t get the chance to grow “at full strength,” so it’s not surprising that high-frequency dual-core processors are the best choice. This is especially true for the Core 2 Duo E8600, where both the frequency of the cores and the cache and the size of the cache are very high. But the E7600 doesn’t look very good compared to the E6500. The difference between 2 and 3 MB of cache isn’t huge, and the frequencies in these families are getting closer and closer together.
When the cache sizes are twice as different, like in the Q9505 and Q9550, you can at least say something. Even though it’s clear that the effect of doubling the cache size at the same frequency is only the same as the effect of increasing the cache by 1 MB and the frequency by 133 MHz in older models. The DDR3 results get worse, but not by much. Compared to everything else, the difference between the two types of memory is small. Even if we compare AMD Athlon II processors to Pentium, it’s clear that they lose. Having more cores doesn’t help, and there isn’t enough cache memory.