Review

Intel Pentium E2140 & E2160 review

The Core 2 range has been highly successful for Intel, delivering unbeatable performance at a price many have been unable to refuse. However, not to be outdone with such a successful product Intel has quietly unleashed a few new - even more affordable - dual-core processors based on the Allendale core.

Intel is relaunching the ever so popular "Pentium" brand name. So what are these new Pentium dual-core processors? Well, in essence they are stripped down Conroe processors featuring a tiny 1MB L2 cache with an 800MHz FSB.

There are two versions currently available, the Pentium E2140 and the E2160. Clocked at 1.8GHz the E2160 matches the E4300 in terms of clock speed while featuring half as much L2 cache. The E2140 on the other hand is now the slowest desktop "Core 2" processor, clocked at just 1.6GHz. With both CPUs priced below the $100 mark ($84 and $99, respectively), this should make for an interesting race against its more expensive siblings.

View: Intel Pentium E2140 & E2160 review @ TechSpot

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Intel Turbo Memory Gets Lukewarm Welcome from Mobo Producers

Next Story

Any Video Converter Free 2.03

26 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Conroes were the first Core processors, right?
Edit: I think they were the first Core2
Edit2: So this new pentium are the ones that have the pentium "dual-core" inside label? As opposed to pentium-D?

Julius Caro said,
Conroes were the first Core processors, right?
Edit: I think they were the first Core2
Edit2: So this new pentium are the ones that have the pentium "dual-core" inside label? As opposed to pentium-D?

Yes, it's not really a Pentium at all, they're just using the name because they don't want to abandon the Pentium brand.

At our school they're planning to put E6420's in schoolpc's! And they are only used for Word etc... Why won't they just buy these, as they seem to be really competitive...

Am I the only one who is starting to become totally confused about Intels models? When I last upgraded it was easy. There was the E6300, the E6400 and the E6600. Now there's all kinds of 6320 etc models and soon were at a point where you don't even want to keep track of them.

Zhivago said,
It's exactly the same logic (3>2>1 etc.)and why would you want to keep track of them?

What I meant was that if I walked into a store without doing any research, I would have no idea which processor would be my best choice because there's so many models to choose from with model names that barely differ from each other.

It's the same thing with video cards. Every time I upgrade I need to read tons of reviews to figure out which model I should choose. Often video card manufacturers release cards that are a bit newer tech, support this and that but end up being slower or only as fast as my previous generation card. The Radeon X1xxx series vs. Radeon X8xx series are a good example of this.

LaXu said,

What I meant was that if I walked into a store without doing any research, I would have no idea which processor would be my best choice because there's so many models to choose from with model names that barely differ from each other.

It's the same thing with video cards. Every time I upgrade I need to read tons of reviews to figure out which model I should choose. Often video card manufacturers release cards that are a bit newer tech, support this and that but end up being slower or only as fast as my previous generation card. The Radeon X1xxx series vs. Radeon X8xx series are a good example of this.

Without doing any research, you should be aware that BMW 7 series > 5 > 3. It's the same here. I don't understand what's confusing about it.

Think about how much marketing dollars Intel have spent on this brand - it is one of the most recognizable brands in the world.

Neowin's discussion here.

raskren said,
geeks != everyone

Geeks definatly are not everyone, but you are hearing a lot more standard people saying "I want that core duo thing"... for as long as its been out its goten name recognition

neufuse said,

Geeks definatly are not everyone, but you are hearing a lot more standard people saying "I want that core duo thing"... for as long as its been out its goten name recognition

Well you must be talking to people who are like yourself, they might actually know a thing or two. When someone is getting a new computer they ask how many pentiums it has, because everyone remember PII, PIII, and P4. It's pretty ridiculous to think in the last year that Core 2 Duo has managed to over take the Pentium name. Intel and Pentium go together like Coke and Cola.

dhitb said,
It's more like "R.I.P. AMD." :(

You couldn't be more wrong. At the moment, AMD and ATI are watching what Intel and NVIDIA are producing, and learning from that, to make the ultimate products, instead of wasting their budget making new products every month. Yes, ATI and AMD have been depressingly quiet lately, but that doesn't mean they're dead.

Intel may have a slight edge over AMD right now, but both processors are able to crank out frame rates so fast the naked eye can't tell a diffeerence between the two--so whether you're running 212 FPS on Intel's Core 2 Duo, or 182 FPS on AMD's Athlon x2 64, you're not going to notice a difference. What the eye sees affects gameplay, not the numbers on a benchmark.

Mistwaver said,

You couldn't be more wrong. At the moment, AMD and ATI are watching what Intel and NVIDIA are producing, and learning from that, to make the ultimate products, instead of wasting their budget making new products every month. Yes, ATI and AMD have been depressingly quiet lately, but that doesn't mean they're dead.


That is some strange logic. AMD's chips have not been competitive in performance, TDP, nor overclockability since the end of battling the failed NetBurst (would have been interesting if electron leakage hadn't bitten Intel in the ass). It wasn't until AMD got a wakeup call that it offered anything price competitive (Brisbane 3600+ is a decent deal). Your excuse is that AMD is just sitting on the sidelines, "waiting for the right time to strike?" What will you think if the unimpressive Barcelona benchmarks hold water? And that's on the high end of things, what will really hurt AMD is taking the volume out of entry level sales, hence the point of my previous post. I know the reality is that they are too large to just cease to exist, but the smaller their budget and marketshare, the less can be spent on R&D, the less innovation can be sought, the less competition is offered, etc.. I won't even touch upon the lackluster R600.