why buy xps m1530 T9300 processor over the t8300??!

Sure it has a 6mb cache over 3mb, but it costs $125 extra. Am I speaking extemporaneously or is .1 ghz in almost all processes negligible except for those who use consistently use encoding processes?

 

.1 ghz in all processes is negligible, hence why going from T9300 to T9500 isn't really practical cause of the cost between the two. HOWEVER T8300 to T9300 has noticible difference because of the larger cache since its double.

Your not... thinking of cancelling your order and re-placing it with a T9300 are you...?

 

The clock speed is not that much faster, but the cache will be much faster.

 

much faster you say? would you cancel your order if you got the 2.4 ghz t8300?

 

lol...

It will be noticably faster. I mean, I wouldn't cancel my order if I got the T8300 considering thats what you chose initially anyway if I were you. Though I'm not you... if you want the best config at the best value and have the money to pay for it... and if you are like me... I would cancel and go for the T9300. The way I think of it, since the refreshes will be much more expensive obviously, it will be difficult to get a similar configuration later. Might as well max it out now while its cheap.

If you get a T9300 now, once Montevina comes out, you'd probably only be able to get 2.0 or 2.2ghz since the price will be higher without discounts.

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=248330
I guess it isn't too important for what I'm using it for...


The_Deity.
Default Re: processor cache for gaming
"Yes, the amount of speed or cashe doesnt affect 99% of games. It all matters on the GPU."

Lithus: "Cache isn't that important at all.
Games depend on the GPU not CPU"

NJoy: "There are no games that could stuff 6 meg cache with instructions."



The Best value?? 125$ is nothing to shirk at for .1ghz more speed that won't affect games anyway

 

Actually, yes it does. If you have say 2.2ghz processor vs 2.4 ghz processor. I know people who tried playing Assasins creed on their 2.2 and were only able to get medium settings whereas 2.4ghz processor might be able to get high settings. The GPU is a BIG FACTOR, but the processor also plays a role too. Your gfx card may not be the best, but if you have a great processor, it would still help it out. Processor is like a compliment to the GPU and helps it out.

Anyways, you want some stats:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html

I let my friend with a 2.2ghz processor play Assasins creed and he was only able to play it with very slow unplayable frame rates at max settings 1024 resolution, but with my T9300ghz, I was able to play it maxed at much faster frame rates smoothly. The GPU provides the bulk, PRocessor gives the extra kick/boost.

 

Yes this is true for a .2 ghz processor difference that is perhaps of a different line of processors, but I'd like to see you proove that 2.3 ghz vs. say 2.4 ghz makes much of a difference on games even with the latter has double the cache . Also, your comparison is baseless as on the xps m1530, as t8300 and up are a different line of processors that have similar aspects and speeds, a .1 ghz difference despite the cache difference cannot be noticeable save for a few applications.

 

Look at the charts...

Your analysis applies to the T9300 and the T9500. Though its different for the T8300 vs T9300. Both having the 8600M GT, processorwise, you are guaranteed to have greater FPS in the T9300 over the T8300.

 

Your analysis is true for the T9300 and T9500, but not the T8300 vs T9300.

You are guaranteed to have increased frames per second with the T9300 as well as better multitasking ability. One of the best things about the increased cache is multitasking. Because of my larger cache, I am able to simultaneously have Assasins Creed, Internet Explorer, Microsoft Word, Need For Speed Underground 2, and Command and Conquer 3 running at the same time and am able to switch between them seamlessly without any lag or choppyness.

T8300 on the other hand, can try to do that, but there will be choppiness and wont be able to switch as fast due to its lower cache.

Sure RAM is the biggest factor in terms of multitasking, etc, but like I said, the processor is what gives the extra final boost. Because of my larger cache, I am able to noticably beat your T8300 with my T9300 in terms of gaming, multitasking, etc.

On the other hand, if I had a T9500 and you had a T9300... there really isn't any noticable difference whatsoever. Sure the T9500 can say its better with its 2.6ghz, and yes it will provide a boost in FPS... but... its so insignificant because the cache gives a much more noticable boost.

If I were you, I'd just stick with the T8300 since you already this far into the ordering process and probably want the system in your hands soon. If it helps, just ignore the cache and think to yourself that it isnt a big deal.

Hope that helps.

 

About 100 higher on the 3d06 marks, I'll be generous and say the t9300 gives a 1/4 of a frame rate higher on games, which of course is negligible, this is comparing the t8300vs t9300

 

Like I said, theres a lot more to it than that. 3dmark is not always accurate. If you want, you could step down from the t8300 and get the next best processor after that, there wouldnt be much of a deal either. Though if you step to the next best option after that, there wouldnt be much of a deal either. But it seriously stacks up. Though like I said, since there isn't THAT big of a difference overall except for the doubled cache... I'd recommend you just stick with it and be happy. Regardless what processor you use, you will not notice the difference since well, thats what you use.

Once you get the T8300, you wont know the benefits of the T9300 unless you've used it. For me, I have used the T8300 on my tablet and switched out for T9500 and had noticable difference (mainly due to the cache), but you can be satisfied with it if you'd like.

Keep in mind that PC Mark doesnt reflect actual realtime usage. 2-3 frame rate difference would be more like 9300 vs 9500. There is a much greater difference between the 8300 vs 9300.

The way I think of it when I bought my laptop is that I wanted the best I could get for the best deal, and that is the T9300 since the T9500 is the negligible one. The T8300 by no means is a slouch, but if you have the money to get the T9300... get it since it helps in the long run.

 

There is average of 5% difference between 8300 and 9300.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=242132

 

I went from T9300 to a T9500 and I saw some differences in my computer speed. I got more marks on 3D06 for sure. Although it wasn't that much, but the games I have seemed to be much more smoother with higher settings. My 2 cents. I'd choose the T9300 over the T8300. At least get the latest processor before Montevina storms the market.

 

Please. Have you tried the T8300 side by side with the T9300 and noticed this difference? Unlikely. Extra cache helps a bit, but I doubt that extra 3 MB is going to help the 50MB plus applications you have running all at the same time. And anyone who says that they are alt-tabbing between games seamlessly is full of it. There is always that few seconds of waiting while the OS is figuring out what to render.

Stick with the T8300 - you will never regret it. I think of all of the times I have made HUGE upgrades in processor power, and I never thought "man, this is waaaay faster!". It's always small increments. Even going from my AMD X2 at 2.5 GHz to my Q6600 at 3.6GHz, which is literally twice as fast, I haven't been wowed. I just think it is a bit faster...

 

Like I said, considering the performance increase from T9300 to T9500... I guess it is noticable, but I dont really notice it, then again I dont game with my tablet... T9300 without a doubt has much more noticable differences compared to the T8300.

Of course you will always have to "wait" when you do everything usually, but if you have the money and provided the awesome deal is there for you to take advantage of noticably shorter "wait"... why not go for it?

 

negligible difference. period. not worth the added cost.

 

Forte, I respectfully disagree. I still feel that the t9300 does not justify $125 and that cache is negligible specifically for games. However if you say the 3d marks don't reflect realtime usage, you have provided no stats to prove otherwise, that the 6mb cache does make, as you say, a great difference in frame rate. Thus while I agree that 6mb cache is superior in certain applications (from simply knowing that 6mb is double 3mb), until I see further proof that directly compares the two processors in gaming, such as the 3d 06 marks which back my claim of an insignificant boost in frame rate, I cannot see the justification for the $125.00 price difference.

 

Keep it then. If you're happy, then that's all that matters . Enjoy it when you get it.

 

Like I said, the T8300 is already no slouch. Just stick with it. Obviously the difference performance is not going to be as high comparing to T7200 to T8300, but if you had not placed your order yet and this were during your LED vs WUXGA period... you should pick the T9300 just because its bigger than T9300 to T9500 and with the deals out right now.

I'd be more worried about receiving an Optiarc Hard drive, bumped out keyboard, unleveled base, and other physical defects rather than T8300 vs T9300 at this point.

 

I already ordered it so no need to change I guess, and I am very worried of the aforementioned problems you mentioned, especially that optiarc hard drive

 

Only professional benchmarks can tell you there is like 5% difference between the two. And you can tell that the T9300 is MUCH faster? I cast my doubt on that.

 

Yeah, the Optiarc drive is the big one and any physical defects like imbalance of notebook that you cannot fix unless you ship it back for a replacment. I mean, at least if you get an Optiarc, you can call for a technician to replace just the drive for free with a different brand.

Apparently the problem as been "fixed", though there are still Optiarc drives in circulation probably. Apparently people that show their DVD drive with SNO on it get something better like Matsu****a, but you never know.

Early way of telling if you have an optiarc drive before you even get to your device manager is if you boot up your laptop and hear a loud irritating sound from your drive. If it is... yeah, its most likely an optiarc.

 

What about the imbalanced keyboard issue? I hear most people get it imbalanced and it's more of a minor annoyance

 

Its not an imbalance. Its just the keyboard bumped out towards the center kinda like a small hill. It is kinda annoying, but its not really a hardware issue. Its just that the cables running underneath the keyboard weren't properly placed when the builders put the keyboard on. To fix the problem, all you have to do is remove the keyboard and arrange the cables underneath the cables yourself so that they are flat. Its nothing you have to get replaced or anything.