M17x Proc question

I'm configuring my M17x and the only thing holding me up is which processor to go with. At first I was leaning towards getting the 2.4 and installing a qx9300. Keep in mind that I've never done a cpu swap, however with Moo's guide and the other posts on here I feel confident that I can do it. My other option is to select one of the processors and not do the switch. The games I'm most interested in are Starcraft 2, Dragon Age: Origins, Diablo 3. I may play some first person shooters, but they aren't too high on my list. Based on what I'm planning on playing, what would you guys do as far as a processor is concerned? (I'll be ordering it with the SLI 260's)

 

get the qx9300.....u will never want anything ever

 

you can swap them, i did.
also dont buy the qx9300 from alienware, its way too expensive.
get it from ebay or some other place for about $500.

 

if you want something in the middle i'd say you'd be fine with the T9600 and maybe overclock it a bit if you fell its necessary

 

shirleyfu1117 on ebay also sells the Q9200 which reads as an extreme in the BIOS. Its as stable as any other, and if you use "best offer", you can get it at around $250. (or less, maybe?) The QX9300 is still better, but the Q9200 is also an excellent price. Some have gotten the Q9200 up to 2.93 GHz. My best is 2.83.
http://cgi.ebay.com/New-Intel-Quad-...a524e6ac4&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14#ht_1665wt_1166
Shirley also has good prices on several dual-core chips including the X9100.

DEC trader sells the QX9300 at a lower price than shirley however, at $474.
Ive seen the QX9300 as high as 3.2 GHz, but most commonly tops at 3.06.
http://www.dectrader.com/507946-001...ide-bus-12MB-total-Level-2-cache-45W-TDP.html

 

So it seems the consensus is to go for the qx9300. I'd rather spend 500 for it and install it myself than to pay Dell 1,000 bucks. I'm dying to order the machine, but i'm trying to hold off so I can see the specs of the new m15x (just in case).

 

Even though it reads as extreme in the BIOS though, it still has locked multipliers, right? If so, then it would make more sense to get the QX9300.

 

Well if all you are doing is gaming, for now, a high-speed dual core is a better value for your money. Currently no games out there I know of can make use of more than two cores.

On the other hand, if you do creativity work, many video editing, photoediting, and 3D apps will gladly take all four cores.

Speaking of which, I found a handy tip that lets me run my most CPU intense 3D app, and still use my computer. Using task manager's set affinity, I assign only 3 cores to my 3D app, and the 4th core to the browser, DVD player, and Majong. I can now be in the middle of the most power-hungry rendering, and still use my machine, whereas before, it was effectively useless untill the task was completed....

 

The new M15x's specs are rather predictable-Montevina processors up to X9100/QX9300, probably 9400M + 260M/280M (single), one hard drive slot. Basically it'll likely be an M17x with one less graphics card and one less hard drive.

Wrong. Multiplier is unlocked.

 

I still wouldn't rule out mobile i7. It's getting pretty late in the game to announce new montevina proc systems.

 

no I have one, the multipliers are unlocked

 

You probably know as well as we do that initial i7 processors are actually pretty poor. The 'extreme' is 2.0GHz.

 

yah... not worth it

 

The Frequency is low, you are right. But don't forget I7/i5 platforms are much more efficient per clock cycle. Just take 2.66 GHz Core i7 and compare it to Quad Core 2 Duo at the same F and see the benchmark results... Core I7 blows it out of water.

 

They are more clock cycle efficient...by 20%. (2.66GHz i7 is slightly slower than a 3GHz quad) Basically that means the mobile i7 'extreme' at 2.0GHz will be the equivelant of about 2.2-2.25GHz quad core-far less than you'll get out of a QX9300. Plus the QX9300 has a lower TDP, meaning more overclocking headroom and a longer battery.

Core i7 will blow dual cores out of the water, providing the processor is actually 100% utilised. Why do you think so many people opt for a faster dual core than a slightly slower quad core? Because few applications actually use the 4 cores in the quad. Similarly, few programs at the moment actually use a lot of processor power. (Crysis only loads up my Q9000 by 65-70%, everything else by far less. Lord of the Rings Online, one of the best looking MMORPGs on the market today, only uses 25%!)

 

the core i7's also only blow the core 2 quads out of the water in a multi gpu setup, for single gpu there is barely a tangible difference

for a laptop, I see no reason to wait for that when the qx9300 is an option

And keep in mind, turbo mode for the mobile i7 parts takes it to 3.2.....so the silicon can handle that meaning sick OC headroom if it is possible