E6500 or e7500

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
kylo

kylo

Distinguished
Sep 13, 2009
146
0
18,680
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E6500 2.93GHz 2MB L2 Cache LGA 775 65W - $95

Intel Core2 Duo E7500 Wolfdale 2.93GHz 3MB L2 Cache LGA 775 65W - $120

why is the E7500 cost that much more..?

I have a minimum budget.... is $25 more for +1MB of cache worth it..... (i dont overclock, and no gaming)

what does the (L2 cache) do anyway?
does wolfdale mean anything special?
 
Solution
outlw6669


The E7500 costs more because it has an extra 1Mb of L2 cache and is branded a Core 2 Duo instead of a Pentium Dual Core.
They are both identical 45nm Wolfdale second generation Core 2 CPUs.

The L2 cache is used to store instructions that are waiting to be processed.
Because it is on die it can be accessed much faster than system RAM.
Having more L2 cach allows you to store more instructions on the CPU.
This can give you a speed boost, in certain apps, where the CPU would be waiting for instructions to be...
Sort by date Sort by votes


The E7500 costs more because it has an extra 1Mb of L2 cache and is branded a Core 2 Duo instead of a Pentium Dual Core.
They are both identical 45nm Wolfdale second generation Core 2 CPUs.

The L2 cache is used to store instructions that are waiting to be processed.
Because it is on die it can be accessed much faster than system RAM.
Having more L2 cach allows you to store more instructions on the CPU.
This can give you a speed boost, in certain apps, where the CPU would be waiting for instructions to be loaded from system RAM.
In practice, the difference in performance between these CPUs should be minimal.

If you are on a budget, the E6500 will give you 95%+ the performance of the E7500.
It is not a bad choice by any means and it should treat you just fine.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution


FYI, they both use the same Wolfdale chip.
The ONLY difference between the two is that the E6500 has more L2 cache disabled (the E7500 also has some disabled).
Both are truly Core 2 Duo CPUs with exception to the marketing.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Why even get a E6500, if its just for surfing, etc. Why not at E3200 or a Athlon II x2 640 at half the price and only marginally less performance?

What we call overclocking nowadays is just running the processor at speeds which they really are designed to run.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote



Well the E3200 or even the E3300 sounds quite okey if you want a cheap one, but I don't like the Celeron brand. I was first going for the AMD Athlon, but then a friend of mine remind me about the consumtion of energy. It runs at 95 watt, it's quite high.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That would have been correct 2 years ago. But the product lines have been totally revamped. The Celerons are Wolfdale cores with less cache (better per clock performance than the E2xxx) and the new Athlons (I meant Athlon II x2 240 in the last Reply) have caught up with Intel in terms of power consumption.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Okey, now we talking (after seen that's run in 65 watt), but I'm still thinking of going for the PD E6500... according to PassMark CPU Benchmark the best choice would be E5200 or E5300, which sells for about 55€ in sweden.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


THE PROBLEM WITH THE E7500 IS THAT IT WILL NOT WORK WITH XP MODE IN WINDOWS 7 . THE E6500 WILL
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
THE PROBLEM WITH THE E7500 IS THAT IT WILL NOT WORK WITH XP MODE IN WINDOWS 7 . THE E6500 WILL
Click to expand...

The hardware virtualization is no loger required. Microsoft released a patch a couple weeks ago.

You have to install XP Mode, Virtual PC, and then the patch.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/v [...] nload.aspx

**Enables Windows XP Mode for PCs without Hardware Assisted Virtualization Technology. For more information,
visit the Frequently Asked Questions page

I am running it on Win 7 Enterprise with a Pentium D 3.2Ghz (does not have virtualization) and it works fine now.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom