P4 EE or P4 Prescott for my 8790 ?

Neither, get a Northwood.

Prescott offers no performance gain and runs hotter and uses more juice compared to a Northwood.

The EE, offers a slight performance gain (clock for clock, less than %10,) but cost around $700 more. It also runs hot.

Get a Northwood, it is a no brainer, in my opinion.

I went with the Prescott with only 1GB Ram. I'd go for the extra Ram over the EE, if I could afford it. The extra 60GB HDD, with Raid-0 will held reading and writing large files. Raid-1 will provide you increased security; however, will not be the "end all" regarding a backup solution.

Hmm. some things i notice with those configurations:
2 60gb 7200 RPM harddrives will put out a ridiculous amout of heat, and drain the battery in minutes (unless 8790s have miricle batteries). one is almost on par with a desktop disk for speed, so in raid those will be amazingly fast.

P4EE is "Extremely Expensive" for what it is (a rebranded server chip), but seems to be performing very well.

Prescott cores arent performing yet, the pipeline (number of steps it takes to process something) is too long to beat out a northwood (or latest xeon like the EE) core until about 4Ghz, and bechmarks seem to have confirmed this.

unless your doing some truly RAM intensive things, anything over a gig of ram wont make all that much difference, ive almost never needed my full GB in here, although with CAD and rendering sort of utilities like your mentioning it might be useful.

Just things to consider about your various parts.

I'm voting for Northwood and 1GB of ram. If you step up to 2 GB, they knock you down to DDR333. You get more RAM, it's just slower and more expensive.

you're wrong about the hard drives PAPPP, they don't take as much power nor produce as much heat as you alluded to.

they are not desktop drives, and thus have MUCH better power management functions. unless you are constantly writing to your disk at max capacity during battery operation, 2 drives won't take that much mroe power.


not anymore lowly, they now offer DDR 400 2gb, but 1GB is more than enough for now, until prices drop.

I believe heat will be a major issue for a 8790. It's basically an improved 4780. But it's also different, and it has just been released - it's so new that actually it's not a good idea to buy one now. The wait has been long, which means that Clevo had several problems releasing it; it also probably means that all problems are not fixed yet.

Buying a computer that is just released is just wanting problems. But if you have to do it, choose the safe way, that is to say the P4 Northwood. The Prescott processor seems to run really very hot, and the 4780 wasn't exactly known for good heat dissipation.

For the hard disks: you can never have enough of them. I'd go for the 2 disks.

The 2Gb RAM isn't really exactly needed; considering the current balance between processor speed, hard disk capacity and video card power, 1Gb is more than enough. Really.

A lot of bashing - any facts to back up your statements? Would really like to see them.

Bashing? What bashing? I'm just trying to be reasonable with my purchases. You might not agree with my point of view

The 8790 sounds and looks like a great machine. But buying a computer that is just released is generally not a good idea. Well, that being said, you can have a perfectly working system - but chances are you won't.

You can't just expect the 8790 to be flawless immediately. There will be a few rough edges that will have to be fixed. It's normal. The 8790 has the new ATI card - perhaps it's not completely reliable yet, perhaps it requires too much power, perhaps it dissipates more heat, perhaps the drivers are not yet optimized (very highly possible, though easy to fix). Perhaps it's going to have a completely unexpected problem - like the BIOS rushed by Clevo and not yet top notch. No one knows, since no one has actually really tested the computer. Perhaps those two hard disks in RAID will have a major glitch. Not to mention I'm just not completely relaxed about the heat part - the Prescott generates a lot of heat, and unless they completely reworked the heat sink and air flowing, the 8790 will get hot. And even if you get the Northwood, I'd expect the new ATI card to generate more heat than the previous one, so the cooling system has to be efficient.

As a rule, I prefer buying an almost-last-generation computer (like the 8890 for instance) fully equipped; I'll get more for less, and far enough power to keep the computer running for a long time. In addition to that, I'll have far more chance to get a reliable computer. For example, the 8890 had a "keyboard flex" problem when it was first released; the problem should be fixed with the latest models.

Depends what you're looking for. My number one priority once I found my dream machine is reliability. Perhaps your priority is the highest performance you can get. But if I am interested in a computer, I'll wait just for a few months until they clean up everything with it -- not to mention that excitement fades off and this helps to actually find out if the machine is the one you actually need, and not that you're buying it for that 0.00001% speed improvement only to find out that the catch is worse reliability and RMA all the way. Impulse buying is bad. But your idea might just be, there's a problem, I send it back, and get another one. Or if it's too late, I eBay it. Why not - I just don't have the time to fiddle with my computer. It just has to work, and if it doesn't, I consider I made a poor purchase decision.

That being said, it is already good that the 8790 is actually based on an 4780, and not on a whole new architecture. My 2 cents. And my sixth computer, too.

Uhm. KidVI do you own one of the Hitachi 7200RPM drives sager uses? Mine is the hottest running component in the laptop.

Robin,

My question remains unanswered. That question was "any facts to back up your statements?". I see you have none and qualify your remarks accordingly -- with respect.

Your reservations are valid; however, I can not see where they are based on fact. It would be nice if you really "had" something factual that would be benifical to me.

Gary,

Point is, I do not understand exactly what questions I should answer to . Questions related to what?

> Reliability of the 8790? I have reservations because I have no facts that prove me that the 8790 is reliable. Time will tell. I'm just basing myself on my experience; no brand-new material works immediately off the box. This is valid for computers, cars and dishwashers. However, all brand-new Sager laptops had problems - just check the pinned threads in the Tech Support sections. For example, the 8890 had a peculiar screen low-bit problem, or a keyboard problem.
> Heat of the 8790? You can't do miracles. It's a small box, crammed full with stuff that WILL generate a lot of heat - a hot Prescott processor, a very hot ATI card (at least from the very sporadic feedback given), two hard disks that will generate more heat than one -- all in a box that isn't exactly known for good heat management (4780).

I think going with Prescott is not a good idea - tests proved that it is not really faster, but it is much hotter. Tests were made on desktop computers, and Prescott doesn't bring you much compared to Northwood - it's not such a new architecture that will keep the Northwood behind in the dust. If the choice was between a 32-bit and a 64-bit processor, then I would have said, go with the 64-bit. But here, you have the choice between a reliable, known, tested, cooler-running processor vs. a new processor that while brand new doesn't even seem to appeal to testers because they say the very minor performance boost is not worth the problems related to it.

I believe they built the 8790 so that it supports the new Prescott properly - at least I hope so - but I don't expect miracles. Just like there weren't really a lot of changes between the 8887 and the 8890 in terms of heat and noise.

...I just want to chip one thought in regarding memory.
Having more RAM memory in general is a BIG drain to battery life. The reason for this is that memory allocation by operating system is mostly inefficient, and leads to continuos refreshes of entire RAM banks by the operating system, looking for data that is stuck somewhere along the banks themselves (hence the name Dynamic to describe the RAM). naturally, the more memory you have the more energy it takes to read them all. This is why generally speaking integrated video chipset laptops (for example, those with Intel Extreme Graphics) have poor performance but yield higher battery life than their standalone memory counterparts.
You are talking here of a laptop that will have a grand total of 2.256 GB of Ram. You should therefore appreciate that just because of this massive quantity of RAM, you will have way less battery life than a mainstream 512 / 64-128 combination (system and video memory).
The same applies to all mobile devices, be they smartphones laptops or PDAs...

Robin,

The case is not the same. M-Tech and several other resellers of this Clevos configuration confirm this. The "heat" routing is different in this configuration from all appearances (exits out the back). Prescot is "hotter"? I have not really seen this reported; however, am interested to see the data on this topic. I have a very old Sager (3363-V) and it also was claimed to be "Hot" and it is; but not too bad. I'm sure that all of your reservations hold true for any product that comes to market; hoever, buying generation "current" minus 1 is not always the best option depending on the "immediate" or perceived need. If you have specific information regarding your concern, I'd really like to have your sources. After all, that is what these forums are about - information sharing. Now if it is just reservations, I've said it before, they are valid; however, don't really help me as I have been looking at these things for a long time and have been involved with computers since 1969 -- a lot of different machines and other "stuff" that are constantly changing.

I was not trying to "slam" you or anything else, just trying to see if you had information that I have not been able to find.

Have a good day!

Gary,

I was hinting about a different heat management since Prescott is in - but still don't expect miracles. I hope for more drastic changes between the 4780 and the 8790 than between the 8887 and the 8890.

The Prescott runs hotter at the same speed than a Northwood, 100% sure, and that is a fact. Let me see if I can find a review that states it, but you can take my word for it.

If I had to go with the 8790 that may be a very good machine even if it has just been released, I would choose a Northwood processor. The last-generation-minus-one is not always the best method, I never said the contrary - all depends. But I would still wait for a month or two just to see what the very first 8790 owners will find out.



- Robin

Quick Googling turns this up:

http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-195-1.htm
Excerpt: "The issue with a longer pipeline TODAY is the clock speed of Prescott is no higher than that of Northwood, and so we will find that Northwood will perform better clock-for-clock than Prescott in many applications, much the same way Athlons do (although to a much lesser extent, of course)." So much for the performance.

"If the Northwood runs at 60C with a TDP of 82W, what would a 103W CPU make? Well, we've been running the 3.20E at 100% load (running Distributed Folding - join our top 20 team!) for the past 2-3 weeks or so. Using the same retail heatsink, the 3.20E was sizzling away at a consistent 77-80 degrees! And yes, THAT IS CELSIUS.
(...)
It should be noted that in all that time, the Prescott didn't produce so much as a hiccup. But if overall case temperatures are a concern, and you have other components that are sensetive to heat, you should probably consider a higher end thermal solution if going with a Prescott. I think we are going to see a whole new wave of mainstream watercooling solutions riding the Prescott core." I'm not sure they put up liquid nitrogen in the 8790.

http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/prescott/
Excerpt: "The main issues with Prescott appear cache access latencies as well as the longer lead-in times caused by the additional pipeline stages. On the positive side are the reduced manufacturing costs and better scalability with performance. Keep in mind, though, that scalablity goes both ways. Compared to Northwood, Prescott runs rather hot and requires excellent cooling."

http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20...escott-30.html
Excerpt: "First, Prescott definitely does not represent monkey business, as it performs at the same level as the Northwood. (...) We should as well put the considerable heat dissipation onto the list, as the Prescott offers no improvement in this increasingly important category. Do you believe buying a Prescott processor is a future-proof investment? You really shouldn't, because that is what Intel wants us to believe, as the real generation and architecture change to socket 775, DDRII memory and PCI Express are few months away yet."

And there's more on the Prescott. Just Google it; this is the tip of the iceberg. And so far, all reviewers said about the same thing. Basically, it's what I said: more heat, no real performance boost, and no real future-proofing (no new architecture like 64-bit or PCI Express).

The 8790 already has the new ATI card that generates heat. It has two hard disks. With the Prescott on top of that, the thermal system must really be impressive. More heat always means less stability and in the long term less durability.

- Robin

Hi,

I've been lurking for awhile now as well, awaiting the 8790. I haven't taken the plunge yet, but I was also stumped as to which chip would make the most sense. I found this article which steered me in the direction of the Northwood: http://www.overclockers.com/articles948/index.asp

A paragraph on the second page about sums it up:

Nothing yet has convinced me that the Prescott is a good way to go..

I ordered the 8790 with the Northwood today. The heat and power issues of the prescott scared me away from it. I also didn't want to wait for it.

I didn't go for the Extreme Edition because after looking at all the benchmarks on all the review sites I felt its slight performance gain wasn't worth the additional price. Additionally I used the money I had planed to spend on the EE on a HP iPAQ 5555 PDA.

Robin,

Thanks a lot. That is what I was looking for. Great info....