I didn't notice any big changes on my Core 2 CPUs due to security patches, I don't think they affect basic use all that much, also I think only the meltdown patch is applied anyway.
It was not so long ago that you'd be just fine using Core2 with an SSD and maxed out memory for basic tasks just fine. Hell, I know people who still use such systems to do their Illustrator work, for example.
Then Meltdown/Spectre happened. The required patches already murdered the snappiness out of Core2 on Windows 10, save for the higher end models with high clocks which are still bearable.
MDS patches will now end up killing them for good.
Of course one can ignore the patches and accept the risks...
It's only the Conroe-based Core 2s that lack SSE4, which was introduced with Penryn. AVX and its successors are the major absence from the larger Core 2 family (and Nehalem, for that matter).
Mind you, I've heard in some quarters that Core 2's performance can really tank in certain modern applications, due to a lot of the chip's performance-enhancing tricks only working with 32-bit code, but I've not seen enough benchmarks to indicate that it's a widespread issue.
I didn't notice any big changes on my Core 2 CPUs due to security patches, I don't think they affect basic use all that much, also I think only the meltdown patch is applied anyway.
Penryn only has SSE4.1, Nehalem has the rest as SSE4.2
Yes, 64 bit mode disables some of the performance enhancing tricks C2D can do. It is most noticeable when running 32bit W10 vs 64bit W10.
The performance hit is there, and it's very noticeable on lower end C2D chips. 65nm variant < 3GHz, for example. On 45nm C2D over 3GHz it's not as bad. This is all running Windows 10. 1903 should run better as it's recompiled with retpoline which isn't as impactful as whatever solution they'd come up with for 1803/1809
You just can't push these machines as hard as you could before all the mitigations, at least on w10.
On 8.1 and 7, they're as snappy as ever. Still snappier when disabling Meltdown mitigations with GRC's tool
Anecdotal story time.
Two weeks ago a coworker that I help with computer issues brought me her "new" laptop in to see if I could make it "faster".
This is the offender (Specs below). HP 15-bs212wm http://www8.hp.com/us/en/laptops/product-details/product-specifications/21503654
This 4.5 lb square of crap is considered worthy of being sold right now, like, wtf.
The only redeeming thing about it is you can put an SSD in it and upgrade the RAM.
So I put a 240GB CS900 and told her that is the fastest it is ever going to be.
Win 10 does well with the amount of memory given, so, my Core 2 Duo Q6600 / 2GB / 60GB SSD system is / was still better to use than this "new" laptop with 4GB and a "modern" processor BECAUSE, those two cores go to 100% usage all the time; Win 10 has a lot going on in the background.
I guess my point is, a quad core Core 2 system (with SSD) is still going to be better than these infuriating "budget" processors that Intel is flooding the low end with.
And yes, the old Q6600 'puter uses more power (80w kill-a-watt reporting), the only down side, as the board does not support the power saving features of the cpu.
Also, eff Intel for selling this crap. https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...-n4000-processor-4m-cache-up-to-2-60-ghz.html
Operating system
Windows 10 Home 64 [22]
Processor family
Intel® Celeron® processor
Processor
Intel® Celeron® N4000 (1.1 GHz base frequency, up to 2.6 GHz burst frequency, 4 MB cache, 2 cores)
Memory
4 GB DDR4-2400 SDRAM (1 x 4 GB)
Hard drive
500 GB 5400 rpm SATA
Optical drive
DVD-Writer [13]
Cloud service
Dropbox [14]
Display
15.6" diagonal HD SVA BrightView WLED-backlit (1366 x 768) [11]
Graphics
Integrated
Graphics (integrated)
Intel® UHD Graphics 600
Ports
2 USB 3.1 Gen 1 (Data Transfer Only); 1 USB 2.0; 1 HDMI; 1 RJ-45; 1 headphone/microphone combo
Expansion slots
1 multi-format SD media card reader
Webcam
HP Webcam with integrated digital microphone
Audio features
Stereo speakers
Wireless
Intel® Wireless-AC 9461 802.11b/g/n/ac (1x1) Wi-Fi® and Bluetooth® 5 Combo
Network interface
Integrated 10/100/1000 GbE LAN [8]
Power supply type
45 W AC power adapter
Battery type
3-cell, 31 Wh Li-ion
Energy efficiency
ENERGY STAR® certified; EPEAT® Silver registered [1,2]
Dimensions (W x D x H)
14.96 x 9.99 x 0.94 in) 38 x 25.38 x 2.38 cm(
Weight
4.52 lb( 2.04 kg)
could you elaborate on the 64 vs 32bit win performance? this sounds interesting but I haven't heard any of that before, and always gave preference to x64 on my C2D PCs, oh yes and on benchmarks that can run on both natively x64 is faster (like CB11.5, Handbrake)
The result is that on average in a typical x86 program, for every 10 instruction, two x86 instructions (called macro-ops by Intel) are fused together. When two x86 instructions are fused together, the 4 decoders can decode 5 instructions in one cycle. The fused instruction travels down the pipeline as a single entity, and this has other advantages: more decode bandwidth, less space taken in the Out of Order (OoO) buffers, and less scheduling overhead. If Intel's "1 out of 10" claims are accurate, macro-ops fusion alone should account for an 11% performance boost relative to architectures that lack the technology.
Intel introduced macro-ops fusion in Conroe, a feature where two coupled x86 instructions could be “fused” and treated as one. They would decode, execute and retire as a single instruction instead of two, effectively widening the hardware in certain situations.
Nehalem added additional instructions that could be fused together, in addition to all of the cases supported in existing Core 2 chips:
The other macro-ops fusion enhancement is that now 64-bit instructions can be fused together, whereas in the past only 32-bit instructions could be. It’s a slight performance improvement but 64-bit code could see a performance improvement on Nehalem.
It was not so long ago that you'd be just fine using Core2 with an SSD and maxed out memory for basic tasks just fine. Hell, I know people who still use such systems to do their Illustrator work, for example.
Then Meltdown/Spectre happened. The required patches already murdered the snappiness out of Core2 on Windows 10, save for the higher end models with high clocks which are still bearable.
MDS patches will now end up killing them for good.
Of course one can ignore the patches and accept the risks...
Anecdotal story time.
Two weeks ago a coworker that I help with computer issues brought me her "new" laptop in to see if I could make it "faster".
This is the offender (Specs below). HP 15-bs212wm http://www8.hp.com/us/en/laptops/product-details/product-specifications/21503654
This 4.5 lb square of crap is considered worthy of being sold right now, like, wtf.
The only redeeming thing about it is you can put an SSD in it and upgrade the RAM.
So I put a 240GB CS900 and told her that is the fastest it is ever going to be.
Win 10 does well with the amount of memory given, so, my Core 2 Duo Q6600 / 2GB / 60GB SSD system is / was still better to use than this "new" laptop with 4GB and a "modern" processor BECAUSE, those two cores go to 100% usage all the time; Win 10 has a lot going on in the background.
I guess my point is, a quad core Core 2 system (with SSD) is still going to be better than these infuriating "budget" processors that Intel is flooding the low end with.
And yes, the old Q6600 'puter uses more power (80w kill-a-watt reporting), the only down side, as the board does not support the power saving features of the cpu.
Also, eff Intel for selling this crap. https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...-n4000-processor-4m-cache-up-to-2-60-ghz.html
Operating system
Windows 10 Home 64 [22]
Processor family
Intel® Celeron® processor
Processor
Intel® Celeron® N4000 (1.1 GHz base frequency, up to 2.6 GHz burst frequency, 4 MB cache, 2 cores)
Memory
4 GB DDR4-2400 SDRAM (1 x 4 GB)
Hard drive
500 GB 5400 rpm SATA
Optical drive
DVD-Writer [13]
Cloud service
Dropbox [14]
Display
15.6" diagonal HD SVA BrightView WLED-backlit (1366 x 768) [11]
Graphics
Integrated
Graphics (integrated)
Intel® UHD Graphics 600
Ports
2 USB 3.1 Gen 1 (Data Transfer Only); 1 USB 2.0; 1 HDMI; 1 RJ-45; 1 headphone/microphone combo
Expansion slots
1 multi-format SD media card reader
Webcam
HP Webcam with integrated digital microphone
Audio features
Stereo speakers
Wireless
Intel® Wireless-AC 9461 802.11b/g/n/ac (1x1) Wi-Fi® and Bluetooth® 5 Combo
Network interface
Integrated 10/100/1000 GbE LAN [8]
Power supply type
45 W AC power adapter
Battery type
3-cell, 31 Wh Li-ion
Energy efficiency
ENERGY STAR® certified; EPEAT® Silver registered [1,2]
Dimensions (W x D x H)
14.96 x 9.99 x 0.94 in) 38 x 25.38 x 2.38 cm(
Weight
4.52 lb( 2.04 kg)
https://en.wikichip.org/w/images/1/19/01-2_Intel_C2_AE_Processor_Architecture-Core.ppt
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1998/3
64 bit mode support for this performance enhancing technique was added in Nehalem, as was the rest of the SSE4 instruction set added as SSE4.2.
More details.
thanks but the wording " It’s a slight performance improvement" is maybe an indication that on average use it's perhaps not a big deal, and let me ask perhaps an obvious question but, the performance improvements for x86 software running on x64 windows would still count for the core 2, I mean it would still "fuse" the 2 x86 instructions for x86(32bit) code on windows x64, or not?
An addendum here, if you have a typical older system with 4GB of Ram or less, and don't have an explicit need for a 64-bit application, you should definitely use 32-bit windows. It uses less Ram and disk space. The only caveat to it is with GPUs using a lot of address space, but in cases of a 512MB or less (or IGP), then absolutely use 32-bit windows there.
It’s $249 at Walmart. I mean there has to compromises there.
don't the extra ram available (vs 3.2GB) compensates enough for the higher utilization? at least I always gave preference to x64 with 4GB, and 32bit with less (like 3 and lower)
An addendum here, if you have a typical older system with 4GB of Ram or less, and don't have an explicit need for a 64-bit application, you should definitely use 32-bit windows. It uses less Ram and disk space. The only caveat to it is with GPUs using a lot of address space, but in cases of a 512MB or less (or IGP), then absolutely use 32-bit windows there.
True and it just proves that many people are better off buying a refurb business laptop for $220-275 that is 3-4 years old. The only thing slowing down an old Dell i5 I have from late 2010 is the crappy intel graphics chip from then along with a not easy way to replace the aging HDD for an ssd.
Just a PSA from a security perspective; 64 bit Windows is more secure. ONLY run 32 bit if needed *for legacy reasons*.
If you have a 64 bit processor, use 64 bit Windows.
True and it just proves that many people are better off buying a refurb business laptop for $220-275 that is 3-4 years old. The only thing slowing down an old Dell i5 I have from late 2010 is the crappy intel graphics chip from then along with a not easy way to replace the aging HDD for an ssd.
I have recently had experience with a "netbook" equipped with some N3xxx something CPU. Dont remember the exact model number, but it had four cores, no HT, 4GB RAM and 64GB eMMC storage. Thin and light, even the 1366 resolution and TN panel did not bother me at that diagonal (12-14", can't remember).
Anyway, it had Windows 10 S preinstalled, upgraded that to windows 10 home for free. That proces took a while. So I thought it would be a dog the whole time. But after installing a few things and just using it for browsing and plex I found it to be a pleasent experience.
I'd never buy it for myself, but just for browsing and streaming, it does just fine. So I would not immediatley disqualify the N range of processors immediatley, there seems to be a few that do minor stuff just fine. But I do agree they need to be in a small chasis to be atractive.