Which would yield more performance?

Keep in mind the computer described in the following scenario will be used for a wide variety of programs/games.

Let's say you had to chose the BEST option to future-proof a new notebook you are buying. You can't do any upgrades down the line, so you need to get the best of what you can now, for all foreseeable future games, as well as current games. Basic BIOS overclocking IS an option, however.

QX9300(12MB Cache) + 4GB 1333MHz

or

Q9000(9MB Cache) + 8GB 1333MHz


Getting the QX9300 + 6GB 1333MHz IS an option. However, this would cost me and additional ~$450, so it's not favorable.

 

I would go for the QX9300 and the 4GB of RAM without the slightest doubt.

 

I'm gonna say Q9000 and 8GB of RAM. You can easily use 6 GB running Vista and 1 game. 8 GB will not be hard to utilize in the future. The Q9000, though clock for clock a bit slower, is still a powerful processor, and you aren't going to notice much of a difference with the Qx9300, especially not in games. Sure the Qx9300 can OC, but so can the Q9000, and the Qx9300 will still hit a heat and voltage barrier before you can even OC it enough to make use of the unlocked multiplier.

 

Thanks for the replies, but... it's 1-1 right now :[

 

definitely the qx9300 and 4GB. anything above 4GB RAM is absolute overkill and you'll never use more.

BS.

 

8gb is overkill, and kinda useless. Go with the QX9300

 

Wow, this is completely untrue. Please don't spread misinformation.

Second this.

 

+1 for the Intel Core 2 Quad QX9300 and 4 GB of RAM Memory option.

You won't need any more than 4 GB of RAM to run Vista and Games properly, the average amount of RAM for a Gaming Computer with Windows Vista is 2 GB of RAM anyway, unless that you are going to do CAD, 3D Modelling, Large Photos Editing or Video Editing, 8 GB of RAM would be useless and outright expensive.

The Intel Core 2 Quad QX9300 processor can reach 3.2 GHz of speed with the proper cooling, the Q9000 can be overclocked as well, but by increasing the Front Side Bus speed, you are not only overclocking the processor's speed, but are putting an extra strain on the motherboard and other components, which also use the Front Side Bus to communicate with the processor.

In conclusion, the Intel Core 2 Quad QX9300 processor will yield more performance clock-per-clock and has more overclocking potential than the Intel Core 2 Quad Q9000 without putting extra strain on your other components.

Get a good Notebook Cooler if you can, I would recommend the NZXT Cryo LX judging from the heat output of the Intel Core 2 Quad QX9300 processor, visit the Cooling Central for more information.

I manage to run a lot of processes on my computer all at once (I have 4 GB of DDR2 RAM @ 800 MHz, however, I made Vista lighter by customizing Services, Processes, and maintain the Operating System periodically), and run memory-heavy games all at once, and my Memory Usage barely reaches 75% (when playing a 1 GB of RAM Game, my Garry's Mod has a lot of custom Add-On's), and there is no noticeable loss in performance, I bet that you will manage to do better than me with 4 GB of RAM.

 

Fixed for you

 

Thanks a bunch everyone. Love NBR.

 

Even though you said that you can't do any upgrades down the line, i find it really hard to believe you can't upgrade RAM in future. I guess all notebooks have user-upgradeable RAM modules, bar few ultraportables which have them soldered to motherboard. CPUs are harder to change and usually void warranty, and also have greater impact on peformance. Therefore, i would rather pick faster Q9300 with 4GB RAM, which is more than enough for today's needs and it doesn't seem that memory demands will go much higher in near future. By the time that happens, 4GB DDR3 modules will be going for much less than now, currently they are WAY overpriced. Even if you really couldn't upgrade memory for some odd reason, faster CPU is still better than extra 4GB RAM which you will hardly use, unless you are some professional working with specialized software that can easily eat 8+ gigs of memory.

 

That's sorta rude bro, especially considering I use 8GB of RAM and speak from facts. I use Vista and I've used about 6.2 GBs playing Crysis, DoDS, TF2, or CSS. Obviously, you're speaking on assumptions, because you've never tried it before. Given 8 GB of RAM, Vista will start doing all sorts of things with it, and generally it'll make your PC faster.

 

That's just not right. For me, Steam takes up 40mb, and HL2.exe takes up 350mb at max. Vista hogs around anywhere from 800mb-1.2GB for me. If you do the math, thats around 1.2GB-1.6GB of physical RAM being used. Honestly, you must be running all four of those games at once to reach such an outrageous usage of RAM.

To the OP: The QX9300 with 4GB of RAM will yield much better results than a Q9000 with 8GB of RAM.

 

I'm not, that's just what the task manager reports for me. Usually I have AIM, MSN, XFire, and sometimes a browser open in the back ground. Not enough to ever usually use that much RAM I know, but it does.

For me, I love 8GB of RAM, but I guess for most people 4 is fine. I just cant see the necessity of a CPU with an unlocked multi in a laptop.

 

I'm sure you can ask yourself a similar question: Why did I opt for 8GB of RAM instead of 4GB, even knowing that 4GB is more than enough? The answer for some people is, they want the extra performance. Even if the performance increase is negligible, some people are willing to throw money into systems believing it will make a big difference, but it is all marketing scheme.

There is a difference between the two CPU's besides an unlocked multiplier, but for the best deal, the OP should opt for 4GB of RAM and a Q9100 2.26Ghz w/ 12mb of cache.

Also, to the OP: Did you mean a Q9000 with 6mb of cache?

 

That's where I was confused, with the processor. I didn't know if he meant the Q9000 or the Q9100. I'd be on your side, with the Q9100 and 4Gb of RAM. Perhaps throw in an SSD with the leftover money?