by Ilya Gavrichenkov
04/22/2008 | 03:37 PM
I don’t think anyone will argue that the transition to 45nm production process allowed Intel to significantly improve their processors on Core micro-architecture. It seems that the new CPUs from Penryn family didn’t get any revolutionary improvements compared with the older Conroe CPUs. However nevertheless, they boast a number of advantages that may seem insignificant at first glance, but combined altogether ensured a tremendous step forward, so that these new processors proved totally praiseworthy.
<%BANNER[article]%>True, Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad processors manufactured with 45nm process can boast higher performance, lower heat dissipation as well as better frequency and overclocking potential than their predecessors. It was possible to improve the consumer features of these processors thanks to new smaller and more economical transistors using metal gate and hafnium based dielectric. However, you should also take into account micro-architectural improvements including larger cache-memory, introduction of new SSE4.1 instructions and changes of some functional units’ operational algorithms. As a result, Penryn processors turned out pretty successful, so that there will hardly be anyone these days to deny it and insist on the superiority of older CPUs manufactured with 65nm process.
However, despite everything we have just said, previous generation processors continue to enjoy steady demand. The reason for this not very logical situation is quite common actually: far not all the users can afford 45nm Intel CPUs. There are currently two problems that prevent new processors from getting widely spread. Firstly, they are quite expensive: the youngest dual-core CPU model with a 45nm core, Core 2 Duo E8200, is currently priced at $163 in the official Intel’s price-list. Secondly, there is a real shortage of new processors in the market today. They are available far not in all large stores, and those retailers who sell them, push their prices way up.
Luckily, not only the end users but also Intel themselves are unhappy about this situation. Within this quarter Intel is going to significantly increase the supplies of 45nm desktop processors and ensure that they are in fact widely available to consumers. At the same time, the company is preparing new Core 2 Duo processor models that will be targeted for less expensive computer systems. In the next few days we should see the new dual-core Core 2 Duo E7200 processor with slightly more modest specifications than those of Core 2 Duo E8200. However, nevertheless, it will have the same core manufactured with 45nm process. Its official price is promised to be $133.
The new processor will become the first representative of the new E7000 line-up that will keep expanding with new inexpensive solutions ousting old 65nm models from the Core 2 Duo E4000 family. In fact, the new Core 2 Duo E7200 is none other but a more up-to-date alternative to the 65nm Core 2 Duo E4700, which doesn’t look convincing at all against the background of the youngest models in the Core 2 Duo E8000 family. The new 45nm core and democratic price point make Core 2 Duo E7200 a pretty intriguing new solution for mainstream computer systems. That is why we decided to devote our today’s review to this particular processor.
Although the new dual-core Core 2 Duo E7200 formally belongs to Wolfdale processor family, it is still very different from its elder brothers from E8000 series. Since this CPU is targeted for a "lower" market segment, Intel did the same thing to it, as they did to Core 2 Duo E4000 family: namely, they limited some of their functionality. I am sure you can guess what features these were: smaller L2 cache and lower processor bus frequency. The L2 cache of the new Core 2 Duo E7200 has been reduced from 6MB to 3MB, and its default bus speed is 1067MHz instead of 1333MHz.
Although Core 2 Duo E7200 is currently the only representative of the E7000 family, it will evidently include new CPUs like that very soon. Especially since 45nm cores with 3MB L2 cache memory is no exotics: Intel uses them a lot. In particular, this processor manufacturer uses them for their quad-core Core 2 Quad Q9300 processors.
So, Intel processor line-up already includes six types of dual-core processors on Core micro-architecture. The table below offers brief specifications for all of them for your reference:
Note that Core 2 Duo E7200 differs from the full-featured Wolfdale by the fact that it has Virtualization technology disabled, which is yet another indication of this processor’s functional limitations from Intel’s stand point.
The nominal clock frequency of the Core 2 Duo E7200 is set at 2.53GHz, which is even lower than the frequency of the youngest Wolfdale processor from the E8000 series. So this CPU will hardly be able to compete even with Core 2 Duo E8200: Core 2 Duo E7200 loses to the latter almost in every specification aspect. However, there is nothing to be surprised with here, since Core 2 Duo E7200 shouldn’t really compete against the E8000 family. It came to replace the Core 2 Duo E4000 line-up. So, if we compare Core 2 Duo E7200 and Core 2 Duo E4700 side by side, the picture will be completely different:
|
| Core 2 Duo E7200 | Core 2 Duo E4700 |
| Codename | Wolfdale | Allendale |
| Nominal frequency | 2.53 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| Bus frequency | 1067 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Multiplier | 9.5x | 13x |
| L2 cache | 3 MB | 2 MB |
| Cores | 2 | 2 |
| Packaging | LGA775 | LGA775 |
| Production process | 45 nm | 65 nm |
| TDP | 65 W | 65 W |
| Enhanced Intel Speedstep | Yes | Yes |
| Intel 64 | Yes | Yes |
| Intel Virtualization Technology | None | None |
| SIMD instructions support | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4.1 | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3 |
| Transistors | 410 mln. | 291 mln. |
| Die size | 107 sq. mm | 143 sq. mm |
| Official price | $133 | $133 |
Although the new Core 2 Duo E7200 yields a little bit to Core 2 Duo E4700 in terms of clock frequency, it boasts a number of advantages: larger L2 cache, faster bus, and a more advanced core from the micro-architectural standpoint.
The diagnostic CPU-Z utility provides some information on the newcomer.
Namely, it indicates that the Core 2 Duo E7200 test sample belongs to M0 revision. This marking is typical of all Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad processors with artificially reduced amount of L2 cache memory. The nominal Vcore for our test processor sample was set at 1.2V, with the maximum nominal voltage setting being a pretty high value of 1.3625V.
When we talk about Core 2 Duo E7200 its exterior appearance also catches your eye, as it differs from that of its dual-core 45nm counterparts. There are much fewer electronic components hanging from the bottom of the chip:
Left - Core 2 Duo E7200, right - Core 2 Duo E8200
The main opponent to Core 2 Duo E7200 should probably be the Core 2 Duo E4700 processor available at the same price point. However, comparing the performance of only these two solutions will hardly be enough to give you a complete picture of what the new CPU is actually capable of. Therefore, we have also included the results for the youngest representatives of the Core 2 Duo E8000 and E6000 processor families. Besides, we couldn’t disregard the competitors from AMD, as they can currently offer their Athlon 64 X2 6000+ in the same price range after the latest price-list refresh.
As a result, the complete systems configuration included the following hardware components:
Note that during the tests of Core 2 Duo E7200 processor supporting FSB 266MHz, we had to switch the memory to DDR3-1066 mode with 5-4-4-15 timings, because contemporary chipsets did not support higher memory frequency dividers. Also during Intel Core 2 Duo E4700 tests the memory worked as DDR3-800 with 5-3-3-12 timings.
The release of the first Wolfdale processor with only half the cache memory of the previous models made us curious about the influence of cache on the resulting performance of the CPU. So, the first test we carried out was about the performance hit accompanying the reduction of L2 cache from 6 to 3 megabytes.
To perform the test we made our Core 2 Duo E7200 work as a Core 2 Duo E8200, i.e. at a frequency of 2.66GHz with a 1333MHz FSB. It’s easy to realize: the default frequency multiplier of the Core 2 Duo E7200 is 9.5x and can be lowered to 7x. Overclocking the FSB from 266 to 333MHz is not a problem. The resulting CPU frequency is close to the default one and is achieved easily.
We can see no catastrophic performance hit because of the reduction of cache memory. Games suffer the most, having a performance hit of 9-10%. The speed of archiving is considerably lower, too. The other applications are quite favorable to the Wolfdale with 3MB L2 cache, running at similar speed on both versions of the 45nm core. The average performance loss with the reduced-cache Wolfdale is about 5%.
SYSmark 2007 is an all-around benchmark that measures the system’s performance at solving typical tasks in popular applications. The resulting picture can be regarded as an overall performance rating of the tested CPUs. You can see the Core 2 Duo E7200 is a lucky replacement to the Core 2 Duo E4700. The new core and the faster FSB provide an 18% performance boost notwithstanding the somewhat lower clock rate of the newer CPU.
As a matter of fact, the Core 2 Duo E7200 is about as fast as the full-featured 65nm Core 2 Duo E6750 which hasn’t become outdated yet due to the deficit of Wolfdale CPUs. On the other hand, the Core 2 Duo E7200 is slower than the junior model of the E8000 series. Costing $30 more, the Core 2 Duo E8200 outperforms the E7200 by 6%.
The Athlon 64 X2 is quite uncompetitive. One of the senior representatives of AMD’s dual-core series is far behind the new Core 2 Duo E7200 although looked passably well against the older Core 2 Duo E4700. So, CPUs with the K8 micro-architecture are unable to compete not only with full-featured Wolfdale CPUs but even with cheaper versions of them.
As we noted repeatedly in our previous reports, the bus frequency and the amount of cache memory have a great effect on a PC system’s performance in games. That’s why the Core 2 Duo E7200 is far slower in the gaming tests than the Core 2 Duo E8200 and E6750. Its performance is alike to that of the Core 2 Duo E6550, the two models competing with each other as equals. However, the latter model is based on a 65nm core and has a lower (by 8%) clock rate.
On the other hand, the new CPU looks most advantageous if compared with the Core 2 Duo E4700. The Core 2 Duo E7200 is going to be appreciated by thrifty gamers who had been favorable to the E4000 series as well. Indeed, the new CPU brings about a 20% performance boost to 3D games at a similar official price.
It’s just the opposite of what we’ve seen in games. The influence of the bus speed and the amount of cache memory is low here as is indicated by the results: the Core 2 Duo E7200 is close behind the Core 2 Duo E8200, mostly due to the lower clock rate. The more advanced micro-architecture of the 45nm core helps the Core 2 Duo E7200 overtake the 65nm predecessor despite the latter’s higher clock rate. The new CPU cannot catch up with the Core 2 Duo E6750, though.
It is at final rendering that the Core 2 Duo E7200 shows its very best. In this test it is only inferior to the Core 2 Duo E8200 but beats the Core 2 Duo E6750 – something that the new CPU cannot do in the other tests – and the rest of its 65nm opponents.
The tests in the popular image and video editing applications from Adobe produce logical results. The Core 2 Duo E7200 fulfils its purpose in filling in the gap between the E8000 and E4000 series.
Mathematical computations in Mathematica and archiving in WinRAR are two very different tasks but the test systems show similar behavior. Both applications demand high memory performance, so it is the FSB frequency that affects the result the most. That’s why the Core 2 Duo E7200 with its 1067MHz bus is inferior to the Core 2 Duo E6550 with a 1333MHz FSB. We don’t see that in other tests.
The Core 2 Duo E7200 provides access to new 45nm cores for less money than before. That’s why this CPU is sure to be an appealing choice for overclocking. Coming at a low price, it should have high overclockability typical of all 45nm CPUs. Added to that, the Core 2 Duo E7200 has a 266MHz FSB and, consequently, a rather high frequency multiplier, 9.5x. This multiplier is only available on the Core 2 Duo E8500, the senior model among full-featured Wolfdale CPUs. You won’t have to lift the FSB frequency too high when overclocking the new CPU and you can achieve good results on any mainboard.
We checked out the overclockability of our sample of Core 2 Duo E7200 using the above-described testbed based on an ASUS P5K3 Deluxe. The CPU was cooled with a Scythe Mugen (Infinity) air cooler.
At a voltage of 1.4V, which is quite safe for continuous use of a Wolfdale, our CPU was stable at a clock rate of 3.9GHz.
Take note that the CPUZ utility reports a core voltage of 1.344V. It’s not an error. The screenshot was taken under load (Prime95 utility), so you see the Vdroop effect here.
Unfortunately, we couldn’t conquer the 4.0GHz peak after increasing the core voltage to 1.4V (in BIOS Setup). It means that the Core 2 Duo E7200 is somewhat worse at overclocking than the Core 2 Duo E8000 which can usually speed up above 4GHz easily.
Well, we did make our Core 2 Duo E7200 stable at 4.0GHz but we had to increase the core voltage to 1.5V for that.
We have noted in our previous reviews that Wolfdale series CPUs responds with increased overclockability to an increase in the core voltage. The Core 2 Duo E7200 is not an exception. Increasing the voltage more you can achieve even higher CPU clock rates. Just don’t forget about proper cooling.
As for performance of the overclocked Core 2 Duo E7200, it is about 10% slower than the same-frequency Wolfdale with a 6MB cache in games and about 5% slower in other applications.
To provide you with a complete picture, we measured the power consumption of the systems (without a monitor) based on the tested CPUs. The CPUs worked in their default modes. The system configurations were the same as in the performance tests. We enabled Enhanced Intel SpeedStep and Cool’n’Quiet technologies. The CPUs were loaded with Prime95 25.5.
As might have been expected, the new 45nm Core 2 Duo E7200 is superior to its predecessor Core 2 Duo E4700 not only in sheer performance but also in power consumption. Wolfdale CPUs have proved they are more economical than their 65nm predecessors in our previous tests, so these numbers cannot surprise us. We can also note that the Core 2 Duo E7200 consumes less power than the Core 2 Duo E8200 which has a larger L2 cache and a slightly higher clock rate. It means that the Core 2 Duo E7200 is not only the most economical Wolfdale currently but also the most economical desktop dual-core processor in general! It needs less power than a Celeron E1200 under load.
I believe it won’t be too much to say that Intel prepared another remarkable product. From the user standpoint, the main advantage of Core 2 Duo E7200 is the fact that its launch reduced the cost of a new CPU with 45nm core. As a result, the new processor that came to replace Core 2 Duo E4700 raises the performance bar for mainstream Intel processors quite noticeably. Of course, it is not faster than Core 2 Duo E8000, losing about 10% to it, but it is significantly faster than Core 2 Duo E6550 and is just a little behind Core 2 Duo E6750. Moreover, Core 2 Duo E7200 boasts great overclocking potential and is capable of hitting frequencies close to 4GHz with just a few simple tricks.
Another strong advantage of the new processor is the lowest heat dissipation among the dual-core the desktop CPUs. It makes this solution extremely interesting not only as a basis for regular mainstream PCs but also as a suitable processor for quiet HTPC systems.
The only thing that may pose some concerns for the Core 2 Duo E7200 marketing future is the possibility of facing the same problems as E8000 these days. I am talking about severe shortages and increased retail prices as a result of that. However, Intel is very determined and is planning to eliminate the desktop Wolfdale shortages in the near future. We hope these are not just words, although even at $160-$170 Core 2 Duo E7200 still remains extremely attractive, since the prices of other Intel processors are far from official ones and AMD cannot currently offer any real alternatives to this CPU.