Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Notebooks > Is there really a huge diffrence between the Core Duo and Core 2 Duo's

Is there really a huge diffrence between the Core Duo and Core 2 Duo's
Thread Tools
xxxrated3dxxx
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Miami,FL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2007, 02:43 AM
 
Hoping to get a little insight and help since I'm pretty new to this....

I want to purchase a Macbook Pro(I really want the 17 inch but will settle for a 15) and I see some really good deals for the Core Duo's but is it really worth it shell out the extra cash for the Core 2 Duo's.... Is it a huge diffrence that's worth the $$$.... A little help and some insight would be greatly appreciated!
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2007, 05:45 AM
 
The C2Ds have a DL burner, FW800, 802.11n, run cooler and are a tad faster. How important are those things to you? How tight is your budget?

Personally, I'd rather take a 15" C2D than a 17" CD.
     
Zeeb
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Manhattan, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2007, 08:48 AM
 
Personally, I feel you should always go with the latest technology you can afford. However, I have a Core Duo and its extremely fast. My roommate has the C2D and for the everyday tasks we both use them for there is no difference.
     
drpepper
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2007, 10:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
The C2Ds have a DL burner, FW800, 802.11n, run cooler and are a tad faster. How important are those things to you? How tight is your budget?

Personally, I'd rather take a 15" C2D than a 17" CD.

Just to be accurate, the 17" CD has FW800 and doesn't run as hot as the 15" CD.

That'd be a tough decision if it's truly down to between being able to go 17" or not.

I think that a 2.16GHz CD performs about the same as a 1.83GHz C2D.

I do agree with this personal assessment though. I'd also personally lean toward - gut level - getting the newer generation at a cost of going from 17" to 15." I can also see sitting there wishing you had gone with the 17" screen...tough decision.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2007, 01:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by drpepper View Post
Just to be accurate, the 17" CD has FW800 and doesn't run as hot as the 15" CD.
That is of course correct. I should have explicitly mentioned that I was comparing the two 15" models.
     
rpster
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2007, 07:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
The C2Ds have a DL burner, FW800, 802.11n, run cooler and are a tad faster.
A quick research on these upgrades gives me a total price difference (in terms of cost) of about $15. Now, considering similarly spec'd refub mbps on the apple store (2.16ghz models), that's a $100. what do you get for $100? FW800, DVD+DL, C2D, extra HDD, and less video ram! Yep, thats right, pay more, less vram (256MB on CD vs. 128MB on C2D)!

In short, is it worth it? Yea, if you're accessing FW800 all the time, you burn dvds EVERYWHERE, you run 64-bit apps, have way to many pr0n files, and you don't play games.....justkidding. whatever you choose, its still a macbook pro.
( Last edited by rpster; Feb 24, 2007 at 07:41 PM. Reason: missing quote)
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2007, 08:01 PM
 
My friend's dad owns a Core Duo and Core 2 Duo. The Core 2 Duo is actually quite noticably faster when exporting 1080p HD video.
     
simonm
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2007, 03:06 AM
 
The 17" Core Duo has a DL burner! I know because I'm typing on one right now. Personally I'd much rather go a 17" Core Duo over a 15" Core 2 Duo. The extra screen real estate is really worth it and you should find some good deals on left-overs.
     
freudling
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2007, 04:32 AM
 
Think about this:

I was going to buy a CD but opted for the C2D. Why? Here is why. First, you get: a DL burner (15" compared), 802.11n, faster, cooler, better on battery life processor with I believe DOUBLE the L2 cache (correct me if I am wrong), 120 GB HD, Firewire 800 (trust me, external hard drives are becoming popular fast), SATA HD, not ATA.

But importantly, Leopard is supposed to be a true 64-bit operating system. The C2D, not the CD, will be able to process at that bit rate. Therefore, for the immediate near future, the C2D will not be outdated for a long time. It is an excellent purchase as a result. The first time in a long time that a computer came with so much of the coming technology. Just keep thinking leopard. You will have wished you went 64 bit processing when you see what it can do.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2007, 04:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by freudling View Post
SATA HD, not ATA.
While I agree with your other points, this one is off. The original CD MBP already came with a SATA HDD. All MBs as well BTW.
     
phazedowt
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2007, 12:09 PM
 
As an academic scientist, the Mac/PC split amongst my peers is about 50/50, and many of them have macbook pros (both CD and C2D). Anecdotally, I can say that amongst my colleagues who have MBPs, those with CD models have had far more problems with their hardware than those with C2Ds. The sheer number of repairs people have had to make on their Rev A machines was enough reason to make me wait for the C2D MBPs to be released before buying a new machine.
15" MBP, 2.33 GHz C2D, 120GB HD, 2 GB RAM, OS X 10.4. 4GB iPod Nano.
     
freudling
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2007, 06:01 PM
 
phazedowt:

You make good comments. I failed to mention that the CD is a Rev A. They also have lots of problems. The facts are: overheating (all units prone to this); poor battery life; expect screen/optical drive problems. It is a Rev A, totally expected. Don't go for the Rev A.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2007, 06:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by freudling View Post
I was going to buy a CD but opted for the C2D. Why? Here is why. First, you get: a DL burner (15" compared), 802.11n, faster, cooler, better on battery life processor with I believe DOUBLE the L2 cache (correct me if I am wrong)
You're right, but doubling the cache size only nets you a performance improvement of about 3.5% (varies from 0 to 10% depending on app).

Originally Posted by freudling View Post
But importantly, Leopard is supposed to be a true 64-bit operating system. The C2D, not the CD, will be able to process at that bit rate. Therefore, for the immediate near future, the C2D will not be outdated for a long time. It is an excellent purchase as a result. The first time in a long time that a computer came with so much of the coming technology. Just keep thinking leopard. You will have wished you went 64 bit processing when you see what it can do.
64-bit does nothing for you in a machine that only supports 3GB RAM. Heck, much of the time it actually hurts performance (by effectively halving bus speeds) rather than helping much. 64-bit doesn't and won't unlock any special features.

64-bit is great for supporting >4GB RAM without hacks like PAE, but it's not the revolution you've made it out to be.
     
bloodline
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Not far from a shop that sells Logic Pro
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2007, 09:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
You're right, but doubling the cache size only nets you a performance improvement of about 3.5% (varies from 0 to 10% depending on app).



64-bit does nothing for you in a machine that only supports 3GB RAM. Heck, much of the time it actually hurts performance (by effectively halving bus speeds) rather than helping much. 64-bit doesn't and won't unlock any special features.

64-bit is great for supporting >4GB RAM without hacks like PAE, but it's not the revolution you've made it out to be.

You do get some architectural improvments, the 8 aditional SSE registers and 8 additional General Purpose registers do allow for greater performance optimisations (also new fastcall instructions)... though register renaming hides the x86's lack of registers very well... I would expect at least 10% improvment when software is compiled for the CPU's long mode over the standard 32bit mode.
2.8 Ghz Unibody MacBook Pro 15" - 4GB Ram - Logic Pro 8.0
2.33 Ghz C2D MacBook Pro 15" - 3GB Ram - Logic Pro 7.2
1.5 Ghz G4 PowerBook 12" - 1.25GB Ram
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2007, 02:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by bloodline View Post
You do get some architectural improvments, the 8 aditional SSE registers and 8 additional General Purpose registers do allow for greater performance optimisations (also new fastcall instructions)... though register renaming hides the x86's lack of registers very well... I would expect at least 10% improvment when software is compiled for the CPU's long mode over the standard 32bit mode.
I'm not saying that C2D isn't faster than CD at the same clockrate. I think the SIMD changes (all exec in 1 cycle) are probably more important for performance-critical code than the extra registers. I'm was just pointing out how big of a difference the extra cache makes, and how little of a difference the number of bits makes.
     
bloodline
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Not far from a shop that sells Logic Pro
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 28, 2007, 07:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
I'm not saying that C2D isn't faster than CD at the same clockrate. I think the SIMD changes (all exec in 1 cycle) are probably more important for performance-critical code than the extra registers. I'm was just pointing out how big of a difference the extra cache makes, and how little of a difference the number of bits makes.
Oh, yeah... the actual number of bits is pretty inconsequential, but the architectral changes between the CD and the C2D are very significant... including, as you say, the enormous cache... especially on that slow 663Mhz FSB
2.8 Ghz Unibody MacBook Pro 15" - 4GB Ram - Logic Pro 8.0
2.33 Ghz C2D MacBook Pro 15" - 3GB Ram - Logic Pro 7.2
1.5 Ghz G4 PowerBook 12" - 1.25GB Ram
     
Javizun
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 1, 2007, 11:23 AM
 
I am selling my macbook pro 17" c2d for 2350.00 with shipping included.
if your interested shoot me a pm.

i have sold here on the macnn marketplace and i have 100% feedback on ebay
A.I.R (ART IS RESISTANCE)
     
markponcelet
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2007, 08:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by freudling View Post
phazedowt:

You make good comments. I failed to mention that the CD is a Rev A. They also have lots of problems. The facts are: overheating (all units prone to this); poor battery life; expect screen/optical drive problems. It is a Rev A, totally expected. Don't go for the Rev A.
As a Rev. A Core Duo 17" Macbook owner, I want to second this opinion. Currently, my MBP is at Apple being repaired for a malfunctioning Z key, and I have already had to send back the power adaptor (broken wire) and a battery (which expanded and broke out of the metal). To be fair, however, I have not experienced any overheating problems on the 17" MBP. Running Civ 4 will max out both cores of the processor, and only gets my processor to 90° C after many hours. (Max temp of a processor core is 100° C.) Optical drive problems and screen problems have been absent, as well.

Contrast that to my backup machine, a 17" Powerbook G4 (Revision D) 1.6 GHz. I've never repaired anything in it, and I've used it for twice as long. It's what I'm using right now. It's solid as a rock.

My verdict: Even if you have to save money longer, go with later revisions of laptops. And yes, it is better to get the 17" screen. But that's just my personal opinion. []
     
macflick
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2007, 05:37 PM
 
15" Rev. A owner- No problems at all. Dont just assume things are bad because the people post the negitive rants about problems. I learned that when I bought it.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:29 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,