NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Dell Forums › Dell Home (Inspiron, XPS, Studio) › Is the extra 300MHz worth $400?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is the extra 300MHz worth $400?

post #1 of 14
10/31/06 at 12:10am
Thread Starter 
Hey all,
Im looking at upgrading my m90 from the 1.8GHz CD it came with to the new T7600 C2D. It lists at about $700 on newegg.com. The T7200, which is 2.0GHz lists at about $300. Is there a huge difference from 2 to 2.3GHz? Is it worth it to spend the money and get the T7600? I use my machine for development, and I tend to run SQL Server, VS 2005, and VMWare with a full linux OS all at the same time on my machine, so I can use all the speed I can get. But, I can live with 2.0 if its not THAT much slower than 2.3, personally id rather have the extra $400 still in my pocket. Also, anyone know if the unlocked C2Ds (T7600G or whatever it is) are available through retail, or are they only being sold to OEMs (specifically Dell)?
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 14
10/31/06 at 12:16am
Theres nothing really there to justify spending high premiums over sweet spot parts such as the C2D T7200 but some people have the money and are willing to spend it to justify the means.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 14
10/31/06 at 12:39am
Well put.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 14
10/31/06 at 1:06am
Ditto. Some people will pay a premium for any speed increase. But it's not really a good value. The T7200 will easily handle almost anything you throw at it & you wouldn't notice the difference much in most envirnoments. So save the $400 for something else.

.. yes Dell is selling the unlocked 7600G, but it's reallllly expensive. Something like $600 or $700 over the T7200.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 14
10/31/06 at 1:15am
Why do you want to upgrade your system at all. We have almost identical systems and there isn’t an App or a game out that my M90 can’t run smooth as silk with the Gfx turned all the way up. I don’t even see a reason for you to spend $300 on the T7200, let alone $700 on the T7600. But hey if you want to play Richie Rich go ahead and get what ever you want.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 14
10/31/06 at 2:08am
Thread Starter 
thanks guys, thats what i was wondering. i didnt know if it was like a big increase due to the architecture or something. I probably will stick with the T7200.

logan, I'm sure we use our systems for different things. I don't just use it for gaming, I develop Enterprise-scale applications and test them from my laptop, often simulating a server load of several hundred users. I actually see both my cores hit 100% usage quite often. I can use every extra MHz, but I'm just trying to make a cost/benefit analysis on it.

But from the sound of it, i'll prob just save the cash to invest in a Dual Xeon dual core server.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 14
10/31/06 at 2:10am
Thread Starter 
logan,
quick question: how long does your battery last? i have the 9 cell and mine lasts for 4 hours with normal screen brightness and wifi. Is it just me, or does that seem like forever given the size and heat given off by this machine?
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 14
10/31/06 at 2:29am
That seems like forever. I only get about 2:15 on an E1705/T7200/7900GS/9-cell with screen brightness = high & wireless on. I would have thought your M90 to be almost identical at the hardware level. I wonder what optimizations double your battery life?
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 14
10/31/06 at 2:33am
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 14
10/31/06 at 4:32am
Thread Starter 
Well, I've got the intel wireless card, and that helps a little bit ive noticed compared to machines that have the dell card. i turned my powermizer slider to max battery life and am using RMClock to control the speedstepping. I was using it to write code in visual studio and do some research with firefox. im using all stock drivers. i guess i got super lucky somehow. cuz i havent really optimized this machine for battery life. I have a D610 that I can carry with me if I need longer run time (it has 2 internal batteries), so I dont really care about my m90 having good run time since im usually near an outlet anyways(except when im too lazy to plug it in :P ).
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 14
10/31/06 at 12:23pm
See my tests for exactly the same upgrade (T2500->T7600) in the thread "About to upgrade". I did some more tests yesterday and the machine is definitely substantially faster. There are some floating point tests on Extreme Hardware to prove the point. I have no numbers but MS Flight Simulator X looks like it is at least 50% faster. My upgrade was definitely worth it.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 14
10/31/06 at 3:27pm
Upgarde is definitely worth. Only if you need the extra juice from CPU. If you are just surfing web, watch DVD and office application,there is no need for it.... Even with playing games.... It only give you few PFS.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 14
10/31/06 at 6:55pm
That is completely untrue for some games. See the review over at ExtremeTech. They had 67 vs 53 FPS in Flight Simulator 2004--I definitely can see a big difference in Flight Simulator X. For video encoding it was 218 seconds Merom vs. 256 Yonah. Lightwave rendering was even bigger at 791 seconds Merom vs. 1079 seconds Yonah. POV Ray Tracing: 299 seconds Merom vs. 389 seconds Yonah. PCMark 2005 5905 points vs. 4036 points Yonah. Look at the astonishing memory read and write tests. In fact, ScienceMark shows a floating point test that is 2.5 TIMES faster on Merom. These are real substantial gains across the board.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 14
11/1/06 at 3:19pm
I just have a quick question for the thread starter, that may very well help you answer your own question.

You have a 1.8ghz CPU, and you're planning on spending $300 on a 2.0ghz cpu? So $300 for 200mhz is fine? So why wouldn't 300mhz be worth $400? I don't know, I think I'd rather pay the $700 and get .5ghz out of it than spending $300 and get a 200mhz upgrade for it.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Dell Forums › Dell Home (Inspiron, XPS, Studio) › Is the extra 300MHz worth $400?