Talk:Conroe (microprocessor)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force.

500 series Conroe-L[edit]

The Conroe-L core has also been used in 500 series mobile Celerons. I have an Acer Aspire 5315-2153 laptop with a Celeron M 530. Socket 479 mPGA (Socket P). Family 6, Ext. Family 6, Model 6, Ext. Model 6, Stepping 1, Revision A1. MMX, SSE 1, 2, 3, 3S, EM64T. 1729 Mhz, x13 multiplier. 32K 8-way L1 data and instruction cache, 1024K 4-way L2 cache. Data is from the latest release of CPU-Z 1.56 Bizzybody (talk) 06:26, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be a Merom-L. Conroe and Merom use the same dies, so the CPUID data is identical, but they have different code names depending on the socket. Arndbergmann (talk) 14:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article name change:?[edit]

I think the article should be renamed Conroe (microarchitecture) because its the tock in the core architecture while penryn is the tick and it would go together with the rest of the tick tock articles, Tick-Tock Matthew Smith (talk) 15:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's even worse than some of the other suggestions you have made. Nothing in this article refers to the microarchitecture. The chip is actually the same one that is used on Merom, Kentsfield, Woodcrest, Coverton and Tigerton. And those all share the microarchitecture with the Penryn/Wolfdale/Yorkfield/Harpertown family that are sometimes all named Penryn together. We specifically introduced the microarchitecture articles to talk about how they are implemented, information that used to be spread over the Celeron/Pentium/Core/Xeon articles, and the per-codename articles that refer to the specific chips and how they are used under the various product names. Splitting the core microarchitecture article between the 65 and 45 nanometer articles would not be helpful because almost all of it's contents refer to the common bits (besides the table listing the actual products), and the difference between the two 45 nanometer chips (Penryn and Dunnington) is arguably much bigger than the difference between Conroe and Dunnington. Arndbergmann (talk) 17:41, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

yeah forget about it I just made a new article instead because it talks about this as a separate processor anyways but its part of the Conroe Microarchitecture/core architecture, just consider this question as closed and will be no renaming Matthew Smith (talk) 18:04, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For other editors trying to follow, this new article: Conroe (microarchitecture).

Question remains if we really need that... --Matthiaspaul (talk) 21:05, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MHz[edit]

The article used the strange units mhz and mHz. I've changed to the SI standard MHz, coincidently the same usage as Intel documentation. If I'm missing some arcane usage point, please revert and explain. 60.240.207.146 (talk) 03:13, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]