Should I get the i7 2620 or i7 2720 in XPS 15?

Hey guys, I'm trying to decide whether to get a i7 2620 or or 2720 for an XPS 15 I'll be ordering soon. The difference is only 30 bucks..will the 2720 emit a lot more heat, fan on more often, etc?

I'll be using the laptop mainly for surfing web (20+ tabs), CS5, running multiple programs at same time, some light gaming (starcraft 2).

Please advise.

 

The TDP is different by 10 watt (dual core vs quad core) both will get toasty under full load. The XPS 15 cooling system can handle 45 watt processors so you should be good to go. 30 bucks is a good deal. If you do CS5 alot and SC2 (NOT light gaming at all, it stresses out even the most expensive gaming rigs), I would go with the quad core i7.

 

Quad definitely

 

30 bucks is too cheap to pass up! all other venders charge 150 +

 

Web surfing = dual core.

CS5 and gaming = quad core.

 

While at first I was very adamant on buying dual cores (due to having used an i7-720QM before), I am now more open to quad cores (since I have an SXPS 16 with i5-460M, which gets damn hot on idle and feels like a quad core, and new i7 quads have better - higher - frequencies than the older gen).

It will be quite hot, much more than the dual core. However, the dual core would still be very hot (compared to what many are used to) at 35W TDP.

 

Yeah this is what I'm worried about - heat. Honestly, an i5 would be just fine for me but Dell is not offering it as an option on the XPS 15. I don't NEED tons of computing power, but I'm thinking more along the lines of future proofing in making my decision as well...

 

Dell still offers the i5 here in the USA:

Dell XPS 15 Laptop Details | Dell

I would still go with the quad core, as the heat will now be less of an issue with Optimus support, and for the sole fact of future proofing for only $30 extra.

 

Best thing is to wait for a month or so. Many people here have ordered their systems and so initial impressions & reviews will come soon. Then you'll know whether i7 quads heat up or drain battery.
The price may also go down if you can wait a little. It will be high at launch to milk the early adopters.

 

I wouldn't say the price is very high...at least in Germany...but here the standard config for better equipped systems is the 2630QM which could be considered best of both...its rather fast...at least on par with the 2620M but its a quad, which might be more futureproof.
You have to consider however that even the 2630QM is considerably faster than any previous generation CPUs...even the 940XM!!

 

I did a search for a benchmark and found PassMark CPU Lookup

For the Passmark benchmark, scores were:
Intel Core i7-2720QM @ 2.20GHz = 7,155
Intel Core i7-2620M @ 2.70GHz = 3,502

So the quad core 2720QM has twice the power of the dual core 2620M

The most expensive option is the 2820QM
Intel Core i7-2820QM @ 2.30GHz = 7,286

Very similar score to the 2720QM

I would love to see a single-threaded benchmark number for the above processors.

 

Don't rely on PassMark, it will just spit out a number just cause it can. The SB make the i7 more potent, higher turbo frequencies. Just stick with the i7 quad core.

 

But the 2620M can reach a slightly higher single-core frequency (by 0.1 GHz) than the 2720QM can, and 2620M can run at a higher base frequency (by 0.5 GHz) without pushing past the TDP. Turbo Boost has to throttle down once heat output gets too much, while the base clock frequency should theoretically be able to be sustained indefinitely.

So the way I see it, if you don't do a lot of multi-core-aware tasks and don't really see the need to for the next few years, you might be better off buying the 2620M.

 

It sounds like you have your mind made up and no factual data beyond the basic capabilities of these processors (which may be the only data you understand by reading your post) will change your mind. I hope you truly enjoy your dual core system.

 

Just looking at the posts in this particular thread, there isn't any "factual data" beyond the basic capabilities, from you or anyone else.

For CS5, yeah, the OP might want quad-core. My response was directed at seanm95 and Tsunade_Hime.

 

This is the very same argument that was used several years ago to justify the higher frequency single core cpu's. The thing is, your buying a laptop based on it's performance with legacy software. Software designers are increasingly moving their products towards multi-core awareness.

IMHO, if you're not sure what you should get, you should probably go for the 2720QM because the cost of upgrading to the quad later would be quite a bit more than the current upgrade cost of $30. Yes you will lose some battery life, but it should extend the usable life of your laptop.

If however you know for a fact that you won't be using multi-core aware software now or in the future, then saving the $30 might be an option.

Most people on here probably upgrade more frequently than the average user, so in terms of resale value, a quad core laptop will probably sell for far more than the $30 cost difference 12-18 months from now.

Personally I think getting a 2720QM for only $30 over the 2620M is a no brainer, but apparently it's not that simple for everyone.

 

My single-core P4 3.8 GHz desktop works just fine for even very recent games (if not at full detail) and watching full HD video. So in my experience, more cores isn't always necessary. It all depends on what you need.

 

If you were going to buy a new computer, would you again buy a P4 since it does everything you need it to? At the time you bought your 3.8Ghz P4, there were plenty of lower clocked cpu's out there, yet you jumped up to one of the fastest P4's made, why when a 3.0Ghz P4 would still run all the programs of the day just fine.

There are plenty of bleeding edge upgrades that just don't make sense. Double the performance in some applications for $30 makes all kinds of sense. Alas, even in the 21 century there will always be those out there that think the world is flat, Just like when we had people swear we'd never need more than 640K of ram, or a processor faster than 1Ghz, or a HDD larger than 1GB, or more than..................... You get the point.

If you KNOW you don't need the quad, don't buy it. But if you aren't sure, you should get the quad if for no other reason than it's only $30 and if you sell your laptop in a few months it will command a premium well in excess of that over a similarly configured dual core XPS 15

(the above is a rehash of what I said in my previous post, but was probably overlooked)

Heck, you could probably spend the $30 now, get on e-bay in 3 months and find someone who bought the XPS 15 with a 2620M and charge him $200 to swap cpu's with you. One thing I know for sure, there will be more people who bought the 2620M that wish they would have spent the $30 for the 2720QM than the other way around.

 

Actually I took a 3.4 GHz Prescott P4 and upgraded to the Prescott-2M P4 last year. Though you can't fairly compare single-core P4s to quad or even dual-core SB processors.

I'm not saying you're wrong-- all the points you make are quite valid. And if you care more about multitasking performance and future-proofing vs. energy efficiency or heat output (have to wait for reviews to see if there's any real truth to this), then $30 for the quad-core upgrade may more than make up for any loss.

 

I'm not sure what exactly you mean by heat output. There should be no problems with heat output when using the quad core processor. If there is, Dell's engineers didn't do their job again and back to dell the computer goes. I understand some people won't do a lot of multitasking on their computers, but then again I think those people aren't buying the XPS laptops either. Just for the sake of running windows 7 faster, I would spend the $30 extra. My desktop is an i7 920 overclocked to 4GHz per core (not including turbo), and windows still uses every one of my 8 threads just for the OS. You could write a book on why windows does this, but the main reason is efficiency. We no longer look at cpu temps; we look at core temps.

I would like to see what the core temps are between the 2620 and 2720 at idle and during a load when we get these. I'll test mine as soon as it's at the desktop screen for the first time. How about you do the same and pick a program of your choice for both of us to use. The results should be interesting.

 

DakkonA,
Figured I'd repost the pertinent part of my reply since you seemed to have snipped it out.

For those that aren't sure about which cpu is best, there is a very old adage that goes something like this: It's better to have something and not need it than to need something and not have it.

 

i would say quad anyday....
even if u don't need it now...

 

i am getting xps 17 with 2630QM..... really wanted 2720QM but couldn't adjust it in my budget damn 3D

 

Yeah, I am also debating the two. I need to decide between these two this weekend. I am not concerned too much about the price difference, just the amount of heat. Will the fan on an XPS 15 be running continuously even when at idle with either of these two?

Also, from the specs, I do not see THAT much difference, but the price difference is about $125. Is it worth that?

 

2720QM..no brainer IMO.

 

OP - you've gotten plenty of good advice. You seem to have already made up your mind, so do what you want