Intel's Core 2 Duo E8500 Wolfdale gets tested

If you'll recall, we already witnessed a pre-production Wolfdale CPU outpace its competition back in August of last year, but the real deal has finally arrived. Over at Hot Hardware, the folks were able to crack open a retail Core 2 Duo E8500 processor, which comes in at 3.16GHz and features 6MB of L2 cache, a 1,333MHz FSB speed and is built on 45-nanometer technology. When put to the test, reviewers found this luscious piece of silicon to be quite the performer, noting that it was probably a better choice for gamers than a low-end quad-core chip. Still, with an expected price of just under three bills, it wasn't exactly seen as the greatest of values, but if you've got the coin and happen to fit the market, the "Recommended" badge tells you everything you need to know.

[mushrooshi @ Mar 1st 2008 5:45PM]

How is a processor "virus protected"

[DB @ Mar 1st 2008 5:51PM]

I guess it just means that, unlike quite a few products these days, it doesn't actually come packaged with a virus.

[Annun @ Mar 1st 2008 5:53PM]

It's called DEP (data execution prevention). It is used to mark parts of the memory as non-executable and it's a way to prevent buffer overflows.

[m @ Mar 1st 2008 6:31PM]

from its massive size, i can only conclude that the box is your first line of protection.

[ethana2 @ Mar 1st 2008 6:25PM]

In case, you know, your OS doesn't do that already... but I do love the intel-VT.. it really performs well with kvm.. handy when you have to run the latest Office, photoshop, or whatever. It'll be nice when WINE hits 1.0 though; so much less wasted memory.

[duffman @ Mar 2nd 2008 1:33AM]

The DEP really only targets three or four known x86 based processor overflows, but Intel and AMD seem to think it's the best thing ever when it comes to their marketing.

[setho @ Mar 1st 2008 5:53PM]

Why waste your dollars? I'm rocking an E8400 which is a 45nm chip @ 3.0Ghz out the box with a 6mb L2 cache, and I've Overclocked it to 3.75, air cooled and not a lot of effort. Plenty of people are air-cooled and O'Cing to 4.2/4.3Ghz. Did I mention it was $185?!?! With overclocking being so easy, you'd be throwing dollars away on minuscule stock Ghz, when you can up the numbers easily yourself.

[James @ Mar 1st 2008 6:38PM]

in 6 months to a year when this is down to $175 you will be saying the same things about this one.

[Loker @ Mar 1st 2008 11:21PM]

4.0GHz here on my E8400 without much of a bump in vcore...temps are amazing on air cooling...

I will say this...the overclock does seem to degrade over time and require you to up the voltage a little to retain stability....

[Jonathan Worrel @ Mar 2nd 2008 2:05AM]

I'm running my Celeron 430 1.8GHz at 3.06GHz on stock cooling over here 24/7. I am very tempted to get an E8500 right this instant, but I'm still waiting out for further insight on the Q9450 / Q9550 to see what would prove best for my rig. My dream for the past two years has been to eventually have a quad core that can run stably at 4GHz 24/7. The Q9450 seems like an ideal candidate for the task, but people are claiming that the FSB tops out at 450MHz which isn't nearly enough to give 4GHz speeds (especially with an 8x locked multiplier). Oh well, I can only hope that Intel will step up the game and give me a quality CPU that I can rely on for the next year and a half - until the 32nm Nehalem's are out :)

[Jonathan Worrel @ Mar 2nd 2008 2:05AM]

I'm running my Celeron 430 1.8GHz at 3.06GHz on stock cooling over here 24/7. I am very tempted to get an E8500 right this instant, but I'm still waiting out for further insight on the Q9450 / Q9550 to see what would prove best for my rig. My dream for the past two years has been to eventually have a quad core that can run stably at 4GHz 24/7. The Q9450 seems like an ideal candidate for the task, but people are claiming that the FSB tops out at 450MHz which isn't nearly enough to give 4GHz speeds (especially with an 8x locked multiplier). Oh well, I can only hope that Intel will step up the game and give me a quality CPU that I can rely on for the next year and a half - until the 32nm Nehalem's are out :)

[Jonathan @ Mar 1st 2008 5:57PM]

"...just under three bills..."

Three $1 bills? Sorry, not familiar with that vernacular.

Instead of trying to write articles wittily maybe you guys should focus on writing articles *accurately*.

[kyle @ Mar 1st 2008 5:59PM]

dumbass

[Jonathan @ Mar 1st 2008 6:00PM]

Sorry you feel that way.

[m @ Mar 1st 2008 6:21PM]

i'm not going to call you names, but that's a very common expression. perhaps instead of making unfair criticisms, you could use google next time.

http://www.answers.com/bill&r=67

bill (bĭl) pronunciation
n.
2. Slang. One hundred dollars.

[ty.cornwall @ Mar 1st 2008 6:15PM]

Three bills would be accurate. It falls under the assumed. See we can reasonably assume that it's not 3 dollars just as we can assume it's not three thousand. So therefore 100's would be the automatic delineator. This falls under a Econ term called Quigemo. It's a extension of the Econ principle of Rendition, as illustrated in the following example:

Customer: How much is this house?

Realtor: Two

Now, I assume it's not two dollars, nor two thousand. I also know my Realtor would not bother showing me a Two Million dollar house... So I translate the two to mean Two Hundred Thousand.

[Amy @ Mar 1st 2008 6:14PM]

I agree. As a non-American, I had to sit there and try to work out what was meant by the term. Maybe the engadget people should realise that it's not only teenage american geeks that read the site.

And I'm still none the wiser regarding the pricing. I'm assuming that a "bill" means $100. Many currencies around the world are not as weak as the US dollar. Here in the UK, we don't go bigger than £50. Since we're talking $2 to the £ at the moment, I guess it still works out. That is assuming the writer meant what I think he meant. And also assuming that we Brits don't get totally shafted on price like we normally do. Yeah right!

[Kamokazi @ Mar 1st 2008 6:17PM]

I agree with him, you're a dumbass.

If you can't figure out what that means in less than 3 seconds or so, you should probably be supervised and wearing a helmet at all times.

[Kamokazi @ Mar 1st 2008 6:36PM]

@Amy

If I'm reading a UK-based website, I assume any measurement or quantity based on UK denominations, aka metric system or pounds. When you come to a US-based site, it's probably a safe bet to assume things are measured on the imperial system and in dollars.

[Iain @ Mar 1st 2008 7:39PM]

@Kamokazi: the Uk is far from exclusively metric, you know.
Anyway, that has nothing to do with the point at hand - I'm sure Amy realised that '3 bills' was referring to a value expressed in USD, she just wasn't sure as to what that value was.


@Amy: in Scotland an N.I. notes go up to £100.

[dale_nx26 @ Mar 1st 2008 11:34PM]

I kinda agree with OP. I think the term benjamin (as in 3 benjamin) is more common and easier to figure out than bill. I did figure wat engadget meant immediately though, but people should give others some slack. Also, in real estate, they'd say 200 to represent 200,000 instead of just two. Who knows, maybe different regions have different idiom.

[Poom @ Mar 2nd 2008 12:58AM]

Amy, I am not American and I started learning English when I was 10. Still, 3 bills for a CPU... You can easily guess that 1 bill represents $100. -_-"

[Wwhat @ Mar 2nd 2008 5:03AM]

Not only is the term well-known, and obvious, but also since the price in europe is not simply a 1 on 1 conversion it doesn't even matter what it means, just check your online shop and see what they dare to ask for it in the UK, which could be anything from 150 to 500 quid.

(quid means british pound sterling)

[mickel @ Mar 3rd 2008 10:01AM]

So you mean Bill Clinton is NOT on the $100 biljet?

Leave the European's alone! (Add Chris Rocker impersonation here...)

[Chris @ Mar 1st 2008 6:02PM]

I'm just waiting for the Q9450 to come out, sure this might beat it for now but in a year I'll win.

[Kamokazi @ Mar 1st 2008 6:25PM]

I've been running a Q6600 for nearly a year now (would gone dual except I'm a supreme commander junkie and it actually uses all 4) and it's definately nice, and the Q9450 is an excellent upgrade, but depending on your system you *may* want to wait for the nahelem chips at the end of this year, they will be the real upgrade over the conroe/penryn-based chips. The Q9450 has appeared on several sites but I don't know if it's actually been 'in stock' and able to be purchased at any of them.

And then again. Nahelem might be garbage and you just wasted a lot of time waiting :-) Being on the cutting edge means you cut from time to time...

[Chris @ Mar 1st 2008 6:34PM]

I'd love to wait but I can't live with this single core P4 and nvidia 7800gt for that long of a wait

[Iain @ Mar 1st 2008 7:41PM]

You'd be waiting 'til 2009 for Nehalem as the processors being released at the end of this year are high-end models only.

So, if the Q9450 is your Yorkfield processor of choice, it's probably safe to assume (with no offence intended) that the Nehalem processors available in '08 wouldn't be the ones you'd consider buying.

[tekdroid @ Mar 1st 2008 6:22PM]

Engineering sample was tested. Reviewer is guessing on expected price (and I suppose performance could change in final product, but not by much, I guess)

I'll continue my policy of buying sub-$100 mainboards and sub-$100 processors every few years as significant chipset and cpu developments hit mainstream (occasionally investing the real money in peripherals and graphics).

Go early-adopters, knock yourselves out.

[OddManOut @ Mar 1st 2008 10:15PM]

I too love those sub $100 prices. I just make sure to keep my software usage about 1 - 3 years behind and it's all good and at highly affordable prices. ie It doesn't matter that the 'new' machine I just built is a lowly X2 4800+ because I still haven't gotten around to buying/playing Halflife 2 (and when I do I'll pick IT up

[Brian @ Mar 1st 2008 6:33PM]

Who cares about dual core? Applications are all going multithreaded... why have two cores when you could have four for not much more?

[Brian @ Mar 1st 2008 6:36PM]

Who cares about dual core? Applications are all going multithreaded... why have two cores when you could have four for not much more?

[notjustdrums @ Mar 1st 2008 7:04PM]

i don't care.

[bartoron @ Mar 1st 2008 7:36PM]

I still have a socket 939 Athlon 64 3700+, and I'm damn proud.

[Alex @ Mar 1st 2008 11:53PM]

Reppin' my X2 4400, but I would love to move on up to an E8200.

I have a feeling that the Nehalem chips will get pushed back to 2009.

[o29 @ Mar 2nd 2008 12:28AM]

I still have an X2 3800+ overclocked by a bit, and it's still treating me well. It managed to run Crysis with some high and some medium settings (as long as most of the more CPU-intensive settings are set to medium). I still thought it looked amazing.

Though honestly I'd buy a Core 2 in a second if I could afford the new motherboard and DDR2 RAM I'd have to buy with it.

[asphixiated @ Mar 1st 2008 7:48PM]

Does anyone know if this will work with P965 Motherboards?

I have a Asus P5B-Deluxe and a E6400 that i would like to upgrade soon.

[Abuzar @ Mar 2nd 2008 1:42AM]

Yeah it will work fine. Just update your BIOS.

[Ben Jacob @ Mar 2nd 2008 7:44AM]

Then what about its cost ?.. A dump with 3.x GHz in 45nm technology !
I have a Core2Quad in my PC