M11x SU4100 vs SU7300

Hello, I am planning on getting an M11x but is the SU7300 CPU upgrade really worth $100? I have heard people say that the two CPUs are pretty much the same. Will they be the same for gaming or everything overall? Or is the SU7300 better?

 

You'll see about a 5% difference maximum in performance. There are only two differences; firstly the SU7300 has 1MB more cache, and the fact that the SU7300 is classified as a 'centrino' processor rather than a 'pentium' processor.

They will perform virtually the same, so it's not really worth it.

 

SU7300 Can be overclocked in the bios to 1.7 as well. SU4100 can't. Its a simple on/off option in the bios.

EDIT: I was wrong both can be OCed, but the SU7300 has 1 more MB of cache, so it really all depends on what your going to be doing

 

okay so then ill stay with the SU4100. Thanks for the help

 

Is this true? SU4100 CANNOT be overclocked using the BIOS option? I didn't see that in the M11x manual. I'd be curious if this was really the case.

 

I dont get this, why not just buy the core2duo? You get brand name for looks AND you get 1MB cache which can only help the struggling proc

 

Actually the SU4100 has core2duo cores , just INTEL has named it a Pentium for some marketing reason, I found this out before i bought my SU4100 based system.

See in the link below under "Intel Pentium Dual Core"

http://www.ialwayscapital.com/2009/07/difference-between-intel-core-2-duo-vs.html

 

Here's the Intel spec comparison too:

http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=43568,42791,

I thought a lot about it. But I am tired of compromising and don't want the SU7300 to excel above SU4100 in some instances where I would have kicked myself. I've done that too much in the past. In the end it may not matter really, but I'm not changing my order.

 

According to passmark the su7300 scores 998 points and the su4100 scores 972 points that`s a 2.67% difference , though my su4100 scores 1060 points, I suppose memory speed and other factors can affect the score.

So unless you need Vt support the su4100 is much better value.

 

Are you sure about that? There hasn't been any confirmation that you can't overclock the SU4100, in fact there was an alienware rep that said you could. I guess I'll find out for sure when I get my su4100 alienware m11x. I'd be wary of giving people the wrong impression.

 

I had read it somewhere, I thought, but I can't for the life of me find where. So I'm going to retract my statement until these get in our hands.

 

I don't see how BIOS option to bump the FSB from default 200mhz to 266mhz would be CPU aware. I have never seen BIOS options remove themselves depending on what CPU was installed.

Both SU4100 and SU7300 have a 6.5x multiplier and a 200mhz FSB.

As mentioned on the owners thread no.2 by a poster/dealer which I believe to be TRUE that both will overclock.

 

It's alrite, there had been several people that were lied to by sales rep about the su4100 not being able to overclock including me. Can't really trust their words so we'll have to wait.

 

Not true. You can overclock the su4100 in the BIOS. How do I know, I've done it!

 

I stand corrected, SU4100 can be OCed.

 

I've gone for the pentium dual core because it's not worth a £40 upgrade just for an extra megabyte of cache - And by the way, processors are designed to operate on maximum efficiency on 1MB cache - You will easily notice the difference on a lower 512MB cache computer - but anything over 2MB and I've yet to witness any noticeable change.
An easy marketing ploy?

I can't stand when people automatically assume that on the basis of an upgrade the weaker component won't perform as well. Granted you admit you stand corrected but don't post "facts" about whether or not overclocking or any other ability is an option on a "lower" based system without actually knowing the facts.

 

only change is 1 MB cache.. u CAN overclock su4100.. (if not in bios.. maybe 3rd part s/w) but as some1 here confirmed... its in bios.
Dont upgrade it unless u get a gr8 discount on the upgrade. Dell are simply cashing on this myth.

 

Hmmm. I am curious about the overclock being a bios only adjustment. I was always under the impression that, for the SU7300 (and more specifically SU9400 as I use), there was a physical change as well.

 

If you look at the date of the OP then you see that it was posted prior to anyone having the M11X and no reviews with specific information No bring back old threads just to jump on an issue already resolved

 

Relieved to see that not everyone is falling for it - I gather you're a pentium dual user as well? If so - How are you find the system in general?

According to previous posts - Dell/ Alienware deliberately underclocked the system for various reasons - It worries me that they have decided to do so - Are they with-holding information that concerns the consequences on overclocking despite advertising the no-risk entailed ability?

 

Dells main push on this was a gaming laptop with great battery power. The reason it was underclocked was to prolong battery life. you don't need a monster CPU to run most games. Thats the reason the chip is undervolted and underclocked. Less power draw= longer battery life. Plus in a laptop as compact as the M11X, you would need more room for cooling if you were running at 2.4GHz.

 

That's worse - Not even knowing the specs and then stating its limits.
The point still stands...

True - But if that had any further substance you wouldn't be seeking to overclock it then, right?
I think we can therefore agree that the processor 'upgrade' - If that's how you wish to refer to it - is simply not worth the cost.

 

10char

 

My point is this: I'm referring to people (not just yourself) who make incorrect assumptions based on limited or non-existent information. The reason I'm making a pressing point over this because the author of the thread was questioning whether or not to purchase the standard Pentium Dual or upgrade to the Core 2 Duo. You clearly provided him with inaccurate information without knowing for definate the result of the investment.
I happened to visit this post after I had purchased my Alienware - If it were someone who worried further than myself they may not have skimmed the entire thread - We're not all willing enough to do so in a hurry.

Could it be that you yourself regret taking the upgrade?

Yes it will vary between individuals - thanks for unnecessary lecture on common sense.

And what is the change in reply that now shows 10char all about?

 

The change in response is because this is a discussion on me being wrong( which was covered two weeks ago), not related to the SU4100 vs SU7300, and thus off topic and not productive.

Why would I regret my upgrade? The system cost $850 flat. didn't have to pay tax, no shipping, it's not like I broke the bank. I'll make use of the extra 1MB

Thanks for your input and wisdom, although a little late to the party don't you think

 

Prove you can make use of it...
Believe it or not it's actually firmly on topic concerning this as an example. I'm just trying to prevent you from making the same mistake twice...
It's just your answer was so blatantly thrown at him I had to step in. Why did you provide an answer if you didn't know any better anyway?
And it's been my pleasure to enlighten you..."better late than never".
You certainly seem reluctant to admit defeat - and seeing as you are so knowledgeable about guides - Perhaps a re-read of this:

http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?i...es?q=admitting+defeat&hl=en&gbv=2&tbs=isch:1"

...might be in order.

 

i have an su4100 and it is beautiful, don't waste the money

 

Good man - Another who sees sense.

Why anyone would want to "upgrade" whilst knowing better?
What else do you actually receive as part of the purchase other than 1MB of cache?

The answer....nout.

Would be interesting to see both systems with identical components with the exception of the processors compete against each other.....

....actually, come to think of it - no it wouldn't.

 

...really?

 

yes. The su4100 is more than enough. Go look at the hothardware review and whatever else and look at the fps this gets at all the games, then realize that they didn't even use the overclock option usually (at least the HH review didnt when I read it) and I think it becomes pretty clear.

Others can disagree and that's fine, but i'm using my overclocked su4100 and it more than delivers with every game I've thrown at it. I love it!

I only have 2gb ram too O.O

 

Sorry, I was referring to the dude above my post. Way to draw out a non existent argument lol

 

Maybe i wasted my money on the U7300 (ordered a few days ago) but i want to run windows7 as a virtual image using Aconis TrueImage.
I read that SU7300 have support for virtualization while the other does not so that is why i payed for this BUT it might be that i misunderstand the Virtualization and it is for things like VMWare and not what i intend to do. In any case i don't want to regret my choice so i payed the extra
If anyone can help me understand this well i will appreciate it

For regular use in regard to Performance i doubt there is any difference between the CPU's though from all the charts i seen. In any case i am really looking forward to get this nice laptop. Want it NOOOW

 

I upgraded and regret the decision 2 days later. It was just spur of the moment.
Would rather have had the Gobi card.

 

Let's try to make it clear once and for all....

As far as I am aware Acronis TrueImage (and Symantec Ghost and similar tools) are used to make a backup of a partition on your hard drive by saving the complete "image", that is taking a snapshot of the entire contents of the partition and storing it in a file somewhere else, like another partition.

However, it seems that that Acronis TrueImage program can also load this giant file and map it (make it appear) as another drive in Windows. This is very similar to what Daemon Tools does with DVD/CD images; which people may be more familiar with.

Virtualization, yes, is for things like VM Ware, that actually use part of your hard drive to install and run another operating system (!) that runs "inside" or as an application in Windows OS. Intel VT (virtualization) refers to hardware technology developed by Intel to enhance this runinng of one OS inside the other (I think AMD has something similar on some of their CPUs). In this case, if you want to try out say Linux (even tho u can literally boot some distributions directly from DVD) off your hard drive without formatting it, splitting partitions, etc. you can do it pretty easily with free version of VMware. You just click an icon in Windows and there you have it full Linux that works almost as if you installed it separately.

Here is the wikipedia entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_VT#Intel_Virtualization_Technology_for_x86_.28Intel_VT-x.29

If you scroll down a little, there will be a section called "Software using Intel VT" which lists the currently available software actually using this feature. There's also a section "Example x86 virtualization scenarios" where it tells you about few typical examples when one deals with virtualizations.

Summary: as someone already mentioned if you do not know what virtualization really is, you don't need it!


I hope this helps.

---


Also, from what I learned by browsing online, this the summary of the facts SU4100 vs SU7300:

1. Intel web comparison: http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=42791,43568,
2. They are both Core2Duo, have 2 cores, source: wiki (note the release prices for two!)
3. SU7300 has 1 MB of Level2 cache more, probably the main thing that pushes is slightly up in performance, source: cpubenchmark.net, PassMark scores - you have to scroll down to find SU4100. SU7300 is just slightly up on the list
4. SU7300 supports Intel Virtualization, unlike SU4100
5. They work on the same frequency, normally 1.3 GHz, overclocked 1.73 GHz
6. They both seem to use and disspate same amount of energy (10 W), source: (wiki) meaning that in principle there won't be difference between two on battery life

 

You forgot to add that SU7300 supports SSE4 / SSE4.1, whereas the SU4100 does not.

That alone, depending on various games, software, etc., could be a potential major performance difference between these 2 processors:

http://download.intel.com/technology/architecture/new-instructions-paper.pdf

 

While it seems it is true SU4100 does lack SSE4 instruction set (the most reliable source I found was cpu-world.com), it seems it hardly matters in pretty much anything. The only review of m11x with SU4100 I know of, is actually the one on NBR:

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=5548&p=3

 

Since I got a free upgrade to SU7300 there isn't this decision.

(I'd have gone with the SU7300 personally... it's a fair choice and price between the two, there isn't a right or wrong decision here... ...)

 

I personally went for the SU7300 just to see exactly how much I could squeeze out of the M11x. I like doing benchmarks and every little bit helps when number chasing.

 

@unreal25:
First thanks for the explanation. I Will read
more about it tommorow. Sitting with my iPhone Now

Just one thing I Should correct you on and that is the usage of VHD
which is
actually not so obvious unless you have tested is
Acronis True image (ATI) usage of VHD files.
In win7 you can actually use ATI to change your boot manager and point at
a created .vhd file and actually boot from the file (run the file as a OS).
So it is not at all comparable with image loaders like daemon tools.

 

Thanks vampyren, I had no idea there is an option for something like that. I am not sure exactly how they made that work, however it's still not to what to virtualization refers to.

How is it a fair choice... ? It costs $100 more, and it offers negligible performance increase. If it came as a free upgrade, then yes, it's an obvious choice. I'd rather upgrade the hard drive to SSD.

That is true. However, it would be more useful to have more FPS benchmarks with different hardware and same game settings. Otherwise most of the comparisons don't really make sense. I think most of us will use the laptop for other things than running 3dMark 06 all the time. Nor will I plan it to have the GPU overclocked (CPU yes if it does not affect battery life) unless the games really become laggy or I need it to do something, which is again unlikely, as I have desktop that I can hook up to remotely, that does those sorts of things.

 

Well it is a choice, no one has to take it and it's not a forced extra $100 -I would have payed the extra for it (and I've seen the benchmarks) personally. If someone doesn't want to then they save themselves that money. That's completely fair! Either you pay extra for it or you don't, they haven't forced people to get it if they don't want to and charged more as stock. It would probably have been easier to only offer the 4100 or the 7300, unless having both as options helps them with amount available for assembly.

I think another way to justify the SU7300 is the M11X needs all the help it can get in the CPU department seeing as the GPU is the real star.

I can see why people are annoyed about the 4100 being under appreciated, I saw a lot of rumours spreading it was a far inferior single core, etc.

 

The one thing I'd like to see is some 4100's in the Benchmark thread. To date I havn't seen any. All the top scores are held by SU7300.

 

I got 1060 points for cpu with my 4100 with the passmark benchmark.

http://www.passmark.com/download/pt_download.htm

 

Again, I don't think it's exactly comparable since it's an Acer laptop.

OK I see what you meant. What I meant its not fair, is it's not fair to charge $100 for such a negligible performance increase. They don't "force" you to get it, however if you're going through EPP, you can't choose not to get it. Otherwise you aren't getting the student discount.

While I see that the CPU is the main bottleneck of m11x, the "upgrade" is really just a small upgrade. And hardly worth $100.

DR650SE, yeah all top are held by SU7300 -- but I'd also add that the top score which is I believe is yours, is also with 256GB SSD, 8 GB RAM and everything OC-ed. The fair test for the CPU would be to take the remaining of the configuration identical, set it up equally and then run the test. However, I have not seen any either, except the official NBR review (their configuration had 4GB RAM and 160GB 5400rpm HD and had ~6200 3dmark06 score with just CPU OC-ed). The other reason from what I've seen written here is most people ordered SU7300 initially so that they could use $100 coupon when m11x was released.

 

Unreal, I agree. For the most part 7300 isn't needed by most users. Actually when I ran the 7105 3DMark06 score, I had stock 4GB Stock RAM and 320GB 7200RPM HDD. I should have included those in the screenshot. Although I could always go back and edit it and relink.

I installed the 8GB two days ago. I had it for my M17x R1 and the SSD went in yesterday. I havn't benched on the SSD at all. It'll be interesting to see how the RAM and SSD affect the scores, but I honestly don't think they will have much of an affect if any. I'm not sure I've even seen somone post a bench run with CPU-Z and GPU-Z pics. I'd like to get my hands on an identical system and test it myself.

 

Where's eggs at, he was supposed to bench the heck out of his stock system with 2gb and su4100!

 

DR650SE - Yeah, I think you're right. I'd say maybe a good test for the hardware would be to run same setup with only 1 thing different (say CPU).

The closest to that I found a non-oc-ed 3dMark06 score by Chewietobacca in the benchmark thread here, which was 5352. That was SU7300 CPU.

The same non-oc-ed test was done by a NRB reviewer on SU4100 build here and it was 5447. I would assume the difference could be attributed to possibly different drivers and maybe uncertainty in this result? What I mean how spread the numbers are ("standard deviation") when you repeatedly run 3DMark over and over. Or it had to do with something else... and the results will simply vary that much from computer to computer.

The higher score was also done with slower hard drive (5400rpm) so as you said it probably didn't really effect it. My point was that during any real stuff other than running benchmarks, you'd notice quite a bigger difference when running on SSD than a hard drive so in that sense it would be a much better upgrade.

 

Yea there definately is a margin of error. Would be interesting to run 10 runs on each and then take an average. Same environment, and everything. I keep my system really cool when benching. One of the reasons my clocks are so much higher.

 

Like many, I'm debating between the 41 and the 73 for an AW M11x. The minor upgrade in performance isn't worth the hundred bucks at all, but I'm still not certain about this whole virtualization thing. One of my first loves is retro gaming, ranging all over the past three decades of computer games, including games that range from DOS-native to XP-native, so good ability to emulate these systems is key—something I would consider paying $100 for.

However, I would not pay $200 for it. Apparently, Win7 only supports XP virtualization if you get Ultimate. Also, it's been suggested that if you have a valid XP license (I do), VMWare is a fine XP emulator.

So, my thinking is still that the 4100 is fine for me, but I want to just ask: will I get any XP-compatability-related bonus from the 7300 if I only have Win7 Home? If not, is it likely that I will in the future? (would hate to get the 4100 and find six months from now that I'm cut off from some options I otherwise wouldn't be. What with it being a non-easily-upgradeable bit of the system)

 

You don't need virtualization to run old DOS-Win games. And for that you most certainly don't need fast CPU. Just a little program called DOSBox. And I'm curious which game runs on XP and does not run on Win7 or on Win7 using it's compatibility mode?

I actually also play those as well from time to time, so I'm using it. The only game I never managed to make work fluently without any quirks is Psycho Pinball, which is THE best pinball ever.