The introduction of Core 2 Duo about a month ago delivered a new processor with about a 25% improvement in performance over the fastest chips in the market. The top-line X6800, running at 2.93GHz, was the most flexible of the new processors, with completely unlocked multipliers up and down. This allowed settings like running at a 13x multiplier (stock is 11x) at 277 FSB (3.6GHz) at default voltage - the result of the incredible head room exhibited by the new Conroe processors.

Intel Core 2 Processors
CPU Clock Speed L2 Cache Price
Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 2.93GHz 4MB $999
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 2.66GHz 4MB $530
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 2.40GHz 4MB $316
Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 2.13GHz 2MB $224
Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 1.86GHz 2MB $183

Unfortunately, the X6800 costs $999 which is way out of the budget range for many buyers - and it's even more at retail right now due to demand and availability, with the best price we're currently tracking at $1150. The good news is the lowest-priced E6300 outperformed every previous Intel chip. Compared to AMD the E6600 outperformed every AMD processor, and costs $364 to $433 compared to the $825 to $950 for the AMD top-line FX-62. (Almost all of the Core 2 processors are being marked up 10% to 20% at retail, though we expect prices to drop over the coming months.)

So is there a catch? The answer is yes and no. The X6800, as stated, is unlocked up and down, allowing the flexibility to do anything you wish with the outstanding head room of the Core 2 Duo architecture. The rest of the Core 2 Duo chips are hard-locked up and down, which greatly limits the flexibility of the head room which often runs 1000MHz, 1500 MHz, or more - depending on the CPU and motherboard. You could only access this extra power at the stock multiplier. This is actually a big negative compared to AM2 processors, where all chips are at least unlocked down.

ASUS has a history of incredible creativity in their mainstream motherboards. Those who recall the P865 Springdale will remember ASUS was the first to implement the "875 only" PAT speedup on the mainstream 865 - making the 865 just as fast as the more expensive 875. On the 925, where Intel had implemented a clock lock, ASUS was the first to find a way to break the clock lock and unleash extended speeds on their 875 motherboards. With this history in mind, it should not come as a surprise that ASUS has just introduced some very creative thinking in a new BIOS for their 965P chipset P5B Deluxe motherboard.

The new 0507 BIOS for the P5B Deluxe, dated 8/10/2006, has two new and exciting features:
  1. Provide better maximum overclocking.
  2. Add the ability to adjust the multiplier of most Conroe CPUs even if they are not Extreme Edition.
The P5B reached about 362x10 in testing for the Conroe Buying Guide: Feeding the Monster. This provides a baseline for comparing the new BIOS to previous results.

Even more exciting is that ASUS says they have found a way to unlock up or down most Conroe chips. This will be a significant new feature that is highly desired by many Core 2 Duo buyers. It didn't take but a few minutes for us to get the new BIOS flashed and a Core 2 Duo chip mounted to check this out.

A pattern has been developing for some time in test results from Core 2 Duo chips. The 2MB Cache chips, the E6300 and E6400, are generally overclocking a bit better than the 4MB E6600, E6700, and X6800 chips. Since performance of the 2MB is a bit lower than the 4MB cache at the same frequency, this means you can make up for some of the 2MB cache deficiency with the ability to run at a faster speed. With this in mind, testing was performed with all 4 of the Core 2 Duo chips that are multiplier locked - the 4MB E6700 and E6600, and the 2MB E6400 and E6300.

E6700 & E6600 – 4MB Cache
Comments Locked

84 Comments

View All Comments

  • Wesley Fink - Thursday, August 24, 2006 - link

    We agree with you. We stated what we found - all Conroes we tested unlocked down. We also told you what Asus told us, but we were clear it could not be confirmed in our own testing. We did see screen shots of a locked Conroe at higher multipliers, but we did not find one in our testing. Our coverage was fair IMHO.
  • Sunrise089 - Friday, August 25, 2006 - link

    I would say the coverage was helpful, but not fair. Or if it was fair, it wasn't what I except from AT. I think normally you guys are pretty tough on campanies that don't deliver on promises, which is great because:

    -You're an advocate for the consumer
    -You serve as a counterweight to huge manufacturer-funded marketing efforts.

    I think your position on promised video-card launch dates that came and went was more what I like - you reported the manufacturer's stated date, but also blasted the GPU maker for letting the dates slip in the past and suggested it was likely to happen again.

    It's fine to publish ASUS's claims, after all you want them to send you products to review, but why not editorialize a little more. Not have one chip that did what they claimed was sure plenty of justification.
  • Sapiens - Saturday, August 26, 2006 - link

    So we should blame ASUS for the lack of Conroe chips at AnandTech that can be unlocked upwards? AT stated ASUS' claims and warned that they weren't able to verify all of them. It sounds like you just want the authors of the article to bash someone.
  • Sunrise089 - Saturday, August 26, 2006 - link

    I want the authors to keep up working on behalf of the consumer. When a company touts a feature that isn't present in many if not most cases, the company shouldn't get much credit for the "feature". Repeating the party line offered by ASUS gives them more credibility than they need to be given here. You and I can all go to ASUS's site and read up on their marketing department's list of reasons to buy their board, I expect AT to revivew the board with an eye to using their expertiese to inform me about it's strengths and weaknesses. An advertised feature that is present in ZERO percent of tested boards is more of a minus than a plus.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now