Core 2 named Pentium

[Demos_sav]

Why is the Core 2 Duo E2160 named Pentium? Does my motherboard support it?

[DanTheBanjoman]

They recycled the Pentium name for budget models, most if not all boards that support C2D support them. They're the new Celerons.

[newtekie1]

Because Intel didn't want to name the E2000 series Core 2 Duos, because they perform worse than the standard Core 2 Duos, and they wanted to keep the Pentium name alive(it is very well known after all).

And according to ASUS the P5WD2 doesn't support any Core 2 Duo processors, including the Pentium E2160.
http://support.asus.com/cpusupport/cpusupport.aspx?SLanguage=en-us&model=P5WD2

They're the new Celerons.

I wouldn't say that, it makes it sound like the E2000 series is bad and perform drastically bad like the old Celerons. The E2000 series are Core 2 Duos, and perform as such, they are the new Pentium Ds perhaps. The Celeron 400 series are the new Celerons.

[btarunr]

I'm sad at the once mighty Pentium name being used in this way. :shadedshu

Edit. newtekie1 is right, the board doesn't take in any processors based on the Core microarch (or at least it's not in the support-list).

[trog100]

it was once mighty but during its later years got hammered by cooking prescots..

but in essence its a conroe with less cache.. i bet the 220 one goes like hell with a 400 fsb.. he he.. nice for setting new super pi records..

so its a crippled conroe not a boosted celeron..

trog

[newtekie1]

Intel's whole line is just a form of crippled Conroes.

The E4000 series are just Conroes with 2MB of cache.
The E2100 series are just Conroes with 1MB of cache.
The E1200 series are just Conroes with 512KB of cache.(They are the newest dual core Celerons).
The Celeron 400 series are just Conroes with 512KB of cache and only one core active.

[trog100]

yes the one chip does all... i would guess the crippling often involves an extra production process making the cheaper chip more expensive to manufacture.. he he

its weird world if u look closely..

trog

[Random Murderer]

yes the one chip does all... i would guess the crippling often involves an extra production process making the cheaper chip more expensive to manufacture.. he he

its weird world if u look closely..

trog

or they just us lower-binned chips and downclock them...

[trog100]

or they just us lower-binned chips and downclock them...

speed bining has always been the public statement.. a suggestion u actually get what u pay for.. pay more for the cream of the crop so to speak..

i think the truth is somewhat different.. they put out what the market demands.. what the market demands dont conveniently match intels speed binning.. so the cream gets artifically crippled by way of lower mutipliers or less cache..

basically the same product gets sold at all diffent prices in a different coloured box..

a total con and complete manipulation and control of market prices.. he he..

all very clever and very efficient..

trog

ps.. which is what modern overclocking is all about.. making the buggers go as fast as god intended.. not what intel tell us..

[newtekie1]

Speed binning still exists, the fact of the matter is that the lower end chips simply don't overclock as well as the high end chips, and require more voltage to achieve the same clock speeds.

My E6600 does 3.6GHz easily in my eVGA 680i board with 1.45v, but my E2160 won't break 3.33GHz on any of my boards, and that is with 1.5v+. I had an E4300 that wouldn't do higher than 3.2GHz. So there is still some speed binning going on.

However, they are also using the lower end chips to get rid of chips that have bad caches(the most common thing to hav manufacturing errors in). If a chip as one bad bit you either have to throw it away, or disable the block of cache that bit is in and sell it for a lower price. Yes, it costs more to add that extra step of disabling the cache. However, that extra cost is very minor. The high priced chips are meant to pay for the expensive research needed to make the chip possible, the mid and low range chips are meant to pay for the production.

[trog100]

Speed binning still exists, the fact of the matter is that the lower end chips simply don't overclock as well as the high end chips, and require more voltage to achieve the same clock speeds.

My E6600 does 3.6GHz easily in my eVGA 680i board with 1.45v, but my E2160 won't break 3.33GHz on any of my boards, and that is with 1.5v+. I had an E4300 that wouldn't do higher than 3.2GHz. So there is still some speed binning going on.

However, they are also using the lower end chips to get rid of chips that have bad caches(the most common thing to hav manufacturing errors in). If a chip as one bad bit you either have to throw it away, or disable the block of cache that bit is in and sell it for a lower price. Yes, it costs more to add that extra step of disabling the cache. However, that extra cost is very minor. The high priced chips are meant to pay for the expensive research needed to make the chip possible, the mid and low range chips are meant to pay for the production.

i believe ya.. :)

trog