This is the day on which Intel plans to introduce Core 2 Duo processors and slash prices across the whole range, as well as killing off a lot of old CPUs.
The desktop launch list will consist of two cores, the Conroe 4M and Conroe 2M. The first comes with four Megs of unified cache, while the latter comes with a Yonah-like two Megs.
Core 2 Duo for the mainstream market is set to go under the names 6300 and 6400. The former is clocked at 1.86GHz, while the latter is runs at 2.13GHz.
The 4MB parts are faster clocked, running at 2.40 and 2.67GHz. I don't know why, but seeing Intel in those lowly-GHz numbers after listening to hundreds of presentations in which we were encouraged to bow the the knee to the "gawd" of megahurtage make me feel a bit nostalgic. Especially since AMD is planning to intro 3.0, 3.2 and cherry-picked 3.4GHz parts.
What is the most interesting part is the fact that 1.33GHz FSB disappeared from the roadmaps, and it seems that Intel is having more problems with their FSB than they would like to admit.
Anyway, here it is, Intel Conroe summer collection at glance:
In a chiffon number: Core 2 Duo
E6300 1.86 GHz, 2MB L2, 65W, $183
E6400 2.16 GHz, 2MB L2, 65W, $224
E6600 2.39 GHz, 4MB L2, 65W, $316
E6700 2.67 GHz, 4MB L2, 65W, $530
Spangly in the extreme: Core 2 Extreme
X6800 2.93 GHz, 4MB L2, 80W, $999
If you're wondering how this line-up will compare to the AMD one, here's a joint comparison (price-wise, not performance-wise). The price of AMD CPUs is the current one, and those prices change regularly.
Battling to turn heads:
Core 2 Duo E6300 vs. Athlon 64 3500+ (single-core)
Core 2 Duo E6400 vs. Athlon 64 3800+ (single-core)
Core 2 Duo E6600 vs. Athlon 64 X2 3800+ Energy Efficient
Core 2 Duo E6700 vs. Athlon 64 X2 4400+ Energy Efficient
Core 2 X6800 vs. Athlon 64 FX-62
Don't know what you think, but my personal opinion is that AMD will have a lot of price adjustments to make in order to become competitive again. Intel theoretically sounds as an unbeatable deal right now. You can expect that "Energy Efficient" marchitecture will probably send the current AMD line-up into oblivion (or just equalise the pricing), since those CPUs right now are even more uncompetitive when it comes to pricing.
Of course, there is also a small matter when it comes to comparing Intel and AMD solutions, both financial and thermal. Since K8 motherboards are usually more affordable than Socket 775 based ones. In the high-end, price differs as much as 40-60 dollars, so we would advise you to take that into consideration. Thermal wise, unless you're reaching out for nForce 590, AMD motherboard will consume around 20 Watts less than equally equipped Intel motherboard, given the lack of NorthBridge chip. µ
Sign up for INQbot – a weekly roundup of the best from the INQ