Thinkpads Forum

Hello:
I currently own a ThinkPad T60p 2623-DDU - T2500(2GHz). I've heard of the "new" Core 2 processor but cannot find information about how this differs from the Core Duo I believe I own, or even if there is a difference - i.e. did they drop the Duo in favor of 2 (which I doubt ..).

Could someone provide a breif overview of what this new Core 2 processor is and if it is worth upgrading from the T60p 2623-DDU?

Thanks!

John

the core 2 duo is 4 cores basically. The Core Duo is 2. You get more cache also so you run alot more applications seemlessly as if they were the only ones running to begin with.

SHoTTa35 wrote:the core 2 duo is 4 cores basically.

Incorrect. "Core 2" is merely a later revision of the Core architecture. The "Duo" version still only has 2 cores (you don't get to multiply the '2' by 'Duo' == 4).

The Core 2 does have more cache, but more importantly, it adds the 64-bit instruction set so you can run 64-bit OS/apps if you wish.

-- Nathan

NathanA wrote:

SHoTTa35 wrote:the core 2 duo is 4 cores basically.

Incorrect. "Core 2" is merely a later revision of the Core architecture. The "Duo" version still only has 2 cores (you don't get to multiply the '2' by 'Duo' == 4).

The Core 2 does have more cache, but more importantly, it adds the 64-bit instruction set so you can run 64-bit OS/apps if you wish.

-- Nathan

Thanks for the responses ... It would be interesting to see a 64bit version of WinXP or Vista running on a Core 2 Duo, but not enough for me to justify an upgrade just yet. I have no interest in widescreen and Windows Vista's UI seems like a poor implementation of a themexp.org style - not to mention the lack of support of SQL 2k and VS 2k3. Thanks again for the info! John

Visual Studio 2003 does run on Vista ... don't know about SQL Server 2000, though -- is that MSDE you are referring to?

At any given clock speed, here are the advantages of Core 2 Duo over Core Duo:

1) 15% faster on AVERAGE (but some things like SSE enabled apps are more than 2X as fast)
2) 64-bit enabled (overkill for laptops currently, but that will probably change in the next year or two as more people want to run 4GB of RAM - which REQUIRES a 64-bit OS)
3) Improved virtulization (if you don't know what it is, you probably don't need to run it)

tomh009 wrote:Visual Studio 2003 does run on Vista ... don't know about SQL Server 2000, though -- is that MSDE you are referring to?

Hello - Visual Studio 2003's debbuger will not work on Vista and Microsoft does not support VS 2k3 on Vista. They decided to split down the middle, sorta, in that they have backward compatibility with VB6 (COM+, etc.) and support Visual Studio 2005. There may have been an indirect benefit since I've noticed quite a few VS 2k5 projects upgraded recently form VS 2k3, even though they are still being developed on WinXP. MS SQL 2K also has issues, some of which are noted at the beginning of installation. No complaints here either since I get the sense from the projects I've worked on that MS SQL 2005 is readily accepted.

I don't use the MSDE since I have an MSDN subscription, but I would think that some or all of the same issues would apply when running WinVista.

Thanks!

John
*I should mention that I don't like the WinVista UI (in a similar way I don't like the option Windows Search you can download and use with MS Office 2007). Also, my T60p runs very *hot* under WinVista - although I don't have the data to support the difference. I did purchase a cooling base but it did concern me and combined with the other reasons I didn't think that it would be worth the wear and tear that my notebook seemed to be taking.

brentpresley wrote:At any given clock speed, here are the advantages of Core 2 Duo over Core Duo:

1) 15% faster on AVERAGE (but some things like SSE enabled apps are more than 2X as fast)
2) 64-bit enabled (overkill for laptops currently, but that will probably change in the next year or two as more people want to run 4GB of RAM - which REQUIRES a 64-bit OS)
3) Improved virtulization (if you don't know what it is, you probably don't need to run it)

Interesting ... I have become used to the fact that there is always new technology just around the corner that will make my notebook obsolete or at least behind in some major area. I have a T43 that I will use every now and then which I've given to my boys. Here I do notice a change, almost as if multi-tasking was taken away.

With respect to your (3) point I am familiar with virtual memory, but I suspect you are referring to something different, perhaps with graphics? I like the 1600X1200 resolution for the realestate when developing software, but am not a gamer and aero hasn't had a major influence on me either. Thanks for the information! John

Ah ... I think I had not tried the debugger.

Unfortunately converting projects to VS2005 is a big task if you have a lot of them -- and then it requires all the developers to move to VS2005 at the same time. Would have much preferred to skip VS2005 and move to VS2008 but that may not come in time ...

Core 2 Duo (C2D) supports 64-bit instructions while the Core Duo does not.

I have a T60p upgraded with a C2D (T7600). I'm running Vista 64, developing under VS 2005, and do testing in an XP Virtual Machine under Vista64. Everything runs smooth a totally reliable.

RonS wrote:Core 2 Duo (C2D) supports 64-bit instructions while the Core Duo does not.

I have a T60p upgraded with a C2D (T7600). I'm running Vista 64, developing under VS 2005, and do testing in an XP Virtual Machine under Vista64. Everything runs smooth a totally reliable.

Cool! Would you mind sharing where you purchased this processor, and if it is a relatively simple thing to do? I can get out of my league rather quickly with hardware modifications but would be very interested to know if this might be an option - especially given the performance enhancements just mentioned!

This is an excellent forum! I'm usually on asp.net or dotnetnuke.com forums. Thanks for the kind and informative responses!

John

tomh009 wrote:Unfortunately converting projects to VS2005 is a big task if you have a lot of them -- and then it requires all the developers to move to VS2005 at the same time. Would have much preferred to skip VS2005 and move to VS2008 but that may not come in time ...

I couldn't agree more and am/was a bit confused why support for VS 2002 & 2003 were dropped in Vista. Here is a link to one of the first blog's I recall reading http://weblogs.asp.net/pwilson/archive/ ... opers.aspx.

I believe the recommendation by Microsoft has been to use Virtual Server to install WinXP and VS 2003/MS 2000, which obviously wasn't received well. On the other hand, once you've had the chance to work with VS 2005 it is hard to go back.