Problems? See this thread at archive.org.
So should I upgrade my cpu to the i7?
-
-
Those numbers are most likely either completely made up or from an early test chip. There's no reason why Haswell would perform worse than Ivy bridge in any task. But really Ivy bridge + dedicated GPU is enough performance for most things and if not a desktop system is a better choice
-
They did it to avoid having a whole separate port for it, and because Apple is really greedy. The following is mostly true but skewed with my opinions:
See, what we know as Thunderbolt used to just be called "Light Peak" and was supposed to go in the USB connector, as an optical standard (ie: Light Peak cables would be fiber optic). It would maintain backward compatibility with USB 3/2/1.1/etc.
Then Apple got to it and said "Hey Intel, we'll pay you a bunch if you license this to us" and Intel said "Ok thank$ a lot for the$e licen$ing things" and Apple took Light Peak, changed it to work with copper wires, put it in the MiniDisplayPort port instead of USB, and found out that copper was too noisy to transfer that much data at once, so they had to also invent "active cables" which means they have *another* chip inside them.
So instead of being this nice fast, scalable, long-cable optical standard, we have a crappy short-cable copper standard with $50 cables, lots more confusion, and very expensive licensing because Apple created this new standard. Unfortunately, the fact that it's so fast to begin with, and the fact that Apple markets to professionals, means that Thunderbolt stuck while Light Peak died. Sony had something similar on one or two models (based on Light Peak) but no one bought it so they killed that off, too.
That is why they do that to confuse people.
It's a new architecture designed for optimal power consumption. There are plenty of reasons that it could perform worse, clock for clock, compared to Ivy Bridge, though not as many reasons as when AMD went from their Phenom line to Piledriver (IPC is similar, etc).
The review did note that the single-threaded benchmarks are not the best things to use sometimes, but overall, we're looking at a ~5% performance increase, which I consider pretty negligible. I think they are accurate numbers, though.
The other thing to consider is that this is a power-focused chip. So while the performance might be only a 5% bump (clock for clock), power consumption might decrease by a much larger amount, making the total performance per watt much greater, and that pays off for mobile computing. For gaming, it means higher overclocks, and that CPUs can be clocked higher at stock. Therefore, we might see a larger than 5% performance difference at the same power level just because the clocks are higher. I'll take that. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
could you tell us where or what county outside the US this model is available? thanks!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Now if only it was MXM I would almost be tempted
-
I'd go for a fresh install and just install the drivers you need and the applications you want
-
-
-
Y400 still beats G46 on the price.
my guess is that an i7+900p G46 will cost twice as much as an i7+768p Y400.
New 14 inch G-Series Notebook
Discussion in 'ASUS Gaming Notebook Forum' started by kurtcocaine, Sep 21, 2012.
