Mobile CPU Wars: Core 2 Duo vs. Core Duo
by Anand Lal Shimpi on August 3, 2006 9:25 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
3D Rendering Performance using 3dsmax 7 & CineBench 9.5
We're looking at 3D rendering performance using two different applications: 3D Studio Max and Cinebench 9.5. Cinebench is a free performance testing utility based off of the CINEMA 4D R8 rendering package. Our scores from 3D Studio Max are a composite score from four rendering tests: CBalls2, SinglePipe2, UnderWater, and 3dsmax5 Rays.
Looking at 3dsmax, the Core 2 Duo performance advantage jumps back up to 12.6% thanks to its wider core and improvements to SSE throughput. If you do heavy 3D work on your notebook, the Core 2 advantage may help you reduce those render times.
Performance under Cinebench mimics what we saw under 3dsmax, with performance going up by around 10% compared to Core Duo.
Application Performance using Winstone 2004
Encoding Performance using DivX 6.1, WME9, Quicktime (H.264) & iTunes
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
46 Comments
View All Comments
juanpoh - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link
Looking at http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentiumm/i...">Intel Pentium M link, only 915 and 855 chipset is supported. However 945 chipset is listed as supported in http://www.intel.com/products/processor/celeron_m/...">Intel Celeron M link.jaybuffet - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link
I have the nx9420 notebook with the 945pm chipset... i was on hp support yesterday, and they said they would not support upgrading the CPU.. does that mean i am SOL because they wont upgrade the BIOS to support it?Pjotr - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link
Please correct the percentage numbers on http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?..."17.5% increase in performance" -> "17.5 % less time used" OR "21.3 % increaase in performance"
Same mistake for all other time based benchmarks.
shecknoscopy - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link
Given the nearly identical architectures of the desktop Conroes and the new Merom chips - how well do all of you think the two would stack up in a direct side-by-side comparison? This is open to blatant conjecture, of course, as the necessary hardware to <b>really</b> make a single-variable experiment isn't out there. But for those of us considering mobile-on-desktop options, how much of a performance cut would we see jumping from a Conroe to a Merom?IntelUser2000 - Saturday, August 5, 2006 - link
Intel mentioned something about having different prefetchers that match the market, meaning Woodcrest's Prefetchers are fit for workstation/server, Conroe for desktop, Merom for mobile applications(performance/battery life).
If you look at Core Extreme X6800 vs. Core 2 Duo E6700 benchmarks, you can see that in some reviews the differences are greater than the 267MHz clock difference(10% clock difference). Maybe Core Extreme has superior prefetchers to the Core 2 Duos, giving advantage in select few applications.
Sunrise089 - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link
This was the exact question I just signed on to ask....so I await and answer as well.shecknoscopy - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link
Woohoo! Great minds think alike, eh? Also, so do ours!JackPack - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link
Which stepping did you use in this test? B1?EagleEye - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link
I think the asus barebones configuration is mislabeled in this article. The s96j has the WXGA 1280x 800 screen while the z96j has the WSXGA 1680x 1050 screen. They either had an s96j or the native resolution is wrong as they stated it.Kalessian - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link
I noticed that, too.