What went so right? It's been 10 years and they're

>>55869422
Still not worth using unless you are 100% broke and can't even afford a used slim form factor optiplex with an i3/i5.

File: 82199517.jpg (100KB, 400x594px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 400x594px

>>55869422
I get 14000 on ocatne with my q6600@stock.

>>55869422

Did you read the Anandtech retrospective article on it?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10525/ten-year-anniversary-of-core-2-duo-and-conroe-moores-law-is-dead-long-live-moores-law

Basically, add more hardware prefetchers and more cache memory and simplify decoders and shorten instruction pipeline to get faster. They pretty much did a "hail mary" bet with changing everything they did from the Pentium 4 to improve performance from redesigning from a laptop improved Pentium 3 chip design to get Core 2. Impressive considering that they actually were able to outperform the extreme edition of the Pentium 4 with a low end E6300 most of the time.

got a 2007 lenovo n220 3000 with a T7300 c2d, still going strong.

>>55869422
I have a white Macbook late 2007 with a Santa Rosa T7500, 2.2ghz, good as new. They did this processor right.

>>55869641
Nice article.

>>55869422
They made solid high frequency dual cores. Their replacements made lower frequency multi cores while the majority of software still only uses one core.

>>55869932
>majority of software still only uses one core.
are you a time traveler from the past?

my 2008 laptop had one. it also played video better than the laptop that i bought last year on black friday. 1 step forward 2 steps back.

Also no forced Management Engine botnet. How cool is that?

>>55869422
nigga I'm still happily shitposting away on my pentium 4

>>55869959
We all are