Customer Reviews
Don't Get "Fanned" 
2008-03-24
To say I was disappointed is a vast understatement!
Though the CPU itself is a very good one, as are most Intel CPUs, the same can't be said for the fan.
To build a fast CPU and then provide this piece of junk to "protect" it is almost criminal.
Of all the fans I have worked with this is by far the worse one. How do you build a heavy fan that will hang vertically in a computer case and use PLASTIC footings is beyond belief.
After properly installing the fan, it took less than one day for it to come loose and almost fry the CPU!.
Checking it out, I found that the plastic footings had just plain pulled loose from the motherboard.
I then went out and bought a third party fan, a Zerotherm CF900 for less than $30.00. This fan has metal mounting legs and once installed is as solid as a rock. It also cools the CPU to about 31 Degrees Centegrade as opposed to the high 50's and low 60's as the Intel fan did the short time it stayed mounted.
So my recommendations are to buy the CPU and NOT the fan from Intel if you want your CPU to live much more than a couple of days unless your motherboard is mounted horizontally so that the cheap plastic legs don't pull out. Then go out and buy a good third party fan like the CF900 and you won't have to worry about it pulling away from the motherboard and turning your CPU into burnt toast.
This might cost you an additional $10 over buying the CPU-Fan combo from Intel but you will get a much safer and better system from the deal. There may be fans that cost only $20 and have metal mountings, but I have not checked this out since I liked the design of the CF900, in which case the cost would be the same as buying the Intel combo product.
My advice to Intel is to stop trying to save 50 cents by using plastic mounting equipment and risking destroying a hundred dollars worth of computing power. The cheap fan might get your customers to come back for a replacement once, but also might drive them to your competitors providing better cooling equipment as it would have with me had I not found a good third party fan to save the day.
This is a pocket rocket....Ignore previous reviewer. 
2008-02-15
What I know: The E2180's only stepping is M0. It was released much more recently the first E2100's. The M0 stepping is NOT a step backwards rather it is a slight improvement in among other things V-Core or CPU voltage core.
Other difference between the E2180 & the E2160/E2140 (either L2 or M0 stepping) is the Clock Multiplier: The value which is Multiplied by the the Front Side Bus (FSB).
At stock speeds the E2180 is 10X multiplier (X) a 200 FSB = 2000Mhz or 2Ghz speed for each processor core.
E2160's have a lower multiplier 9x so 9Multplier x 200Mhz FSB = 1.8Ghz
It is possible that an E2160 or an E2140 could be Overclocked further (stably) than an E2180. But this is not because of L2 or M0 stepping but rather a role of luck. Some processors are binned higher. There are poor E2140/E2160 L2 & M0 steppings just as there are great Overclocking E2160/E2140/E2180 chips. For the previous reviewer to make a statement that is wrong/false/misleading in so many ways does no one any good when trying to look at a processor.
While debates rage all day some swear by a lower multiplier some a higher one. But neither factors in that ALL CPU's are not made the same. Friends with the same motherboard & same CPU...same memory case/power supply etc. One is able to Overclock this chip to 3.7 with voltage increases while the other friend reaches only 3.3 stably no matter how much voltage. That's life. No two systems will clock identically.
But some additional facts to consider. If you are running this stock. The E2180 will be be slightly faster 2.0Ghz Vs E2160 1.8Ghz per cores.
If you do OC. Suppose you decide you want to OC any E2000 to 3.0Ghz (A MODERATE OC on these excellent processors).
The E2180 (10 x 300Mhz FSB)=~3.0Ghz
The E2160 (09 x 333Mhz FSB)=~3.0Ghz
The E2140 (08 x 375Mhz FSB)=~3.0Ghz
The more you raise the FSB - the more stress you put on your Northbridge. Some cheaper motherboards have hardwired FSB limitations. The higher multiplier E2180 & E2200 will be able to reach a higher speed sooner all other things being equal.
These processors are capable of 75%-100% overclocking on AIR heat sink fans. For this processor that is 3.5Ghz - 4.0Ghz. That is a huge bang for your dollar. Using Overclocking negates or can make up for some programs where this processors 1MB L2 Cache (compared to E4000's 2MB, and E6000's 4MB L2 cache) may slightly slow performance.
Use google to search sites like anandtech, extreme overclockers etc for verified user/ and technicians.
When you look at the four current lines of Intel Core 2 Duo desktop processors out: The E2000's, the E4000's, the E6000's, & the newest Penryn (Wolfdale) E8400 soon to be more E8000's; it can be difficult to decide which one to buy.
Many people use the sole factor of cost of the processor to determine. The E2000's are great processors for the majority of the public at Stock speeds (NOT EVERYONE LIKES TO OC OR NEEDS TO OVERCLOCK)!!! BUT IF YOU DO: For OC'ing enthusiasts these processors (can) offer amazing performance equal to or greater than their $200 - $300+ more expensive E6000 & E8400 lines.
Yes, obviously you can spend more on the E6000 & E8400 line & OC further for example the new Intel Penryn E8400 is able to OC from Stock 3.0Ghz to 4.0-4.5Ghz on after-market (AIR) heatsink fan combinations. It offers a number of other improvements (a smaller die size 45nm, new transitor gates, better power regulation/conserving, & SSE4.1 video instructions) make it a superior processor in all ways but PRICING.
These processors (E2000) are not on the same level...but these are also priced well below $100. If you are surfing the net, playing music/movies, writing papers etc...no need to look any further. Even gaming although you'll need a good Video card & may need to OC the processor. Do your research.
Even the $30-80 more for an E4000 is unlikely to benefit a majority of people for simply gaining 1MB of L2 cache. Going from the E2000's 1MB to the E4000's 2MB of L2 cache can be overcome by overclocking your E2000 if needed, but for & by average computer users the extra L2 cache offers very little. (Don't confuse L2 Cache with L2 Stepping they have NOTHING to do with each other; L2 cache is a small amount of memory included on the CPU's die).
(Newer game/gamers, video editing/encoding etc. users would likely benefit from the extra cache but would likely be into the E6000's/E8400 or Quad core processors. If you need VT (Virtualization Technology) for for running multiple OS's virtually, then look to the E6000's & Q6000....better yet the E8000's & the upcomming Quad Penryn (Yorkfield) processors as the E2000's & E4000's don't offer (VT). The improvements in power saving & consumption of the E8000's & Q9000's will pay for themselves over the long time over the E6000's & Q6000's.
That's one more thing to point out. The E2000's will draw the least power at stock although the new (E8400 line's power reduction technology gives you a much faster stock speed at low energy usage).
Full Disclosure: I own an E6750, an E4400, and an E2180. I intend to purchase an E8400 when the prices stabalize & supplies increase. Look for the buying/price point to drop to Tray (price per 1000CPUs) of $183 within a few months.
M0 stepping 
2007-09-14
This cpu is part of those other with the M0 stepping wich is a bad sign for overclock. I recommend getting the E2160 or E4400 for better results (make sure you get L2 step on the E4400, there's also a M0 version)
