i7 4940mx vs 4910mq

I'm ordering a custom laptop from Falcon NW. Yes, I know it's very overpriced, but I've recently stumbled upon some cash and I've always wanted one. I'll be using the laptop in my lab to run a number of cpu intensive science programs, although I shouldn't need more than 2.7 ghz for this work. In my free time I like to play Total War games (mainly Empire, Shogun FOTS, and Rome II) and open world games with lots of NPCs like GTA 4/5 and Assassin's Creed. I'm also a flight sim junkie (IL-2 Stalingrad, FSX).

I'm debating between the 4940mx and the 4910mq for my processor. They are close in specs, but you get .200mhz extra power from the baseline of the 4940mx, which is also unlocked compared to the locked 4910mq. The 4910mq uses 10W less than the 4940mx and therefore would run a little cooler and have better battery life. What kind of battery life could I expect just surfing the web or using word processing with a 4940mx? Would I seen an improvement in gaming using the 4940mx? Some reviews say the 4910mq actually performs better for gaming, but I cannot see why. As for my other specs, I will be going with a 980m video card and 16gb DDR3 RAM. Everything will run off of a solid state drive.

Thanks for your help!

 

Have you looked at the Sager NP9722? It has a i7 4790k desktop cpu which would be cheaper/faster than the two you've listed. http://www.xoticpc.com/sager-np9772-clevo-p770zm-p-7856.html

 

There's going to be little tangible difference between the i7-4910MQ and the i7-4940MX - nothing noticeable performance-wise. Battery life should be the same as well assuming both are kept at stock clocks.

The TDP (47W/57W) isn't a measure of power consumption, it's a measure of thermal output. The i7-4940MX is spec'd with a higher TDP because it's unlocked and can be overclocked to a certain point. If overclocked, it will produce more heat and thus will need a more powerful heastink to accommodate it.

I would strongly recommend the i7-4910MQ from an economical perspective ...save the money or perhaps spend it on more RAM (if 32GB is available).

 

He wants good battery life. Desktop i7 4790K is not ideal for that.

OP: You say you use science programs. Don`t they benefit from a fast processor? Like finishing computing/rendering etc faster? Overclocking the CPU and have more time to fool around on reddit etc?

 

Yes, for the science programs I use the more cpu the better, but I really don't need more than ~2.7ghz or so. Still, the more the better since the programs I use will continue to run faster (obviously they run best on high end desktops). I currently have an old Alienware M11x R32 with 8GB of ram and a 1.5ghz i7 that runs my science programs pretty well when overclocked. I'm just looking to upgrade to a more powerful, modern system, primarily for gaming since my Alienware no longer has enough power. I considered computers with desktop processors but they have no battery life... For FSX 3.0ghz or more is good, I prefer not to overclock, so 2.9ghz would be fine but 3.1ghz would be better. I try to keep things as cool as possible. Gaming wise I'll mainly be using this computer to play Total War games with the graphics maxed out and unit size on ultra. I want to be able to run huge battles with lots of projectiles... currently if too many cannons are on screen on my m11x it eventually crashes... Would 32gb of ram be useful? I thought nothing gamewise really uses that much ram.

I forgot to mention that I'd be getting a 15'' TLX, not a 17''. This will affect the cooling ability I'm afraid.

The types of science programs I use are things like R, etomo, and imod. I do lots of cryoelectron tomography so I use imod to construct and analyze tomograms.

 

Seriously, Falcon NW?!

But I digress. Get something based on the Clevo P77xZM/P75xZM barebones with a 4790K. Short of the P570WM, that's the fastest CPU in a laptop by a wide margin and much cheaper than 4910MQ and esp. 4940MX. The 4.4 GHz really shines in a single-threaded game like FSX.

 

Indeed Falcon are totally overpriced... A Sager will be much cheaper and more powerful...

 

What about an Origin ENO-x? I'm just worried about the build quality and the cooling problems/short battery life of a desktop cpu. Otherwise I'd prefer that option since they are less expensive. With the Falcon NW I'd get 2 1/2 to 3 hours of non video/gaming battery time. I imagine with a desktop processor it would be more like 1 hour, which isn't enough to make it through a class or meeting without plugging in. I can plug it in at my lab bench, but not during meetings, etc.

 

From what i can gather, the 4910, and 4940 themselves are literally the same chip. With intel's process of producing chips, over time as yields increase and the chips can sustain slightly higher clocks by default, intel clocks them 100mhz or so higher etc and then call it a day.
So in this regard, the 4910 and 4940 are literally the same and will perform pretty much the same in about everything so if you can get a 4910 for cheap id go for it rather than overpaying a bit for the same performance.

With regards to the origin eon-x series and any of the clevo/sager spinoffs that use the desktop cpu, the fan sounds might be a bit louder than the 4910/4940 laptops, but lets face it the 4910/4940 laptops themselves werent too quiet to begin with. The desktop 4790k will far and away outperform the 4910/4940, no contest.
The battery life on the desktop cpu'd laptops may be worse but then it is still within the 2hours of battery life when gaming ballpark so it wont be too bad.

 

^Actually that's not true. The 4940MX is unlocked, the 4910MQ is not. You're thinking of the 4900MQ vs. 4910MQ.

 

Oh right, my bad, overclockingwise i imagine the 4940 will pull away from the 4910 by a bit of a margin then.

 

4940MX is the same chip as 4790K but without an IHS, clocked lower and priced $700 higher

 

Uhh... @csacwp I don't mean to burst your bubble, but you're literally just overpaying by going to OriginPC or Falcon Northwest. They are built off Clevo barebones shells, just like Sager/Mythlogic/Eurocom/etc systems are, and thus will perform EXACTLY THE SAME. I'm going to assume you are asking about the P170SM-A models from them. In this case, let me explain.

If your brightness is somewhat lowered and the 4910MQ or 4940MX is running at a minimum load, due to optimus essentially turning off the dGPU, I could say that I easily get 2 hours out of my PC and you should be capable of getting 3 or more out of yours, as I always have two GPUs on in SLI on battery.

Next, if you want real CPU power, you're going to want to fiddle with your XTU settings. I'd say the 4910MQ would be able to achieve higher clockspeeds and hold them while consuming less power than the 4940MX can, and therefore unless you wish to go past 4.3GHz on the CPU when all 4 cores are under load, you'd be fine with the 4910MQ. So get the 4910MQ =D.

 

How much battery would I have with a 4790K running at minimum load? How will the Origin be able to stay cool with this card? I heard they invented a new type of heat sink for it, but I still can't believe it.

 

I can get a top end pc from Origin for the same price as the same computer from Mythlogic. Just checked. I guess what it's come down to is 4910mq vs 4790k... not sure which would be better for my needs, and I'm worried a desktop processor will have terrible battery and will fry itself in no time. The price difference between the two pc's I've configured is $300 or so.

 

The 4790K won't exactly take a whole lot more than the mobile chips... because they're the same chips essentially. The lack of battery life in the P7xxZM series is due to the lack of "Optimus" where the dGPU cannot be turned off and the iGPU used. Optimus' only advantage is the use of the iGPU (which cannot usually be chosen; it's always on pretty much) for battery life. It only has downsides otherwise, but if battery life really is that important to you, then the 4910MQ-using P170SM-A is your best bet.

Also, please remember Mythlogic has a 3% discount if you pay with cash (does not show up on their website; only shows up after you place the order). They are also more expensive than Sager, but usually offer more customization options like SSD brands/RAM/etc.

 

Ah, so Optimus is only on the mobile chips... I keep my Alienware set to the intergrated gpu when I'm not gaming and get somehwere around 8 hours of battery life. I might miss that in my next computer, although obviously it wouldn't get that many hours even with optimus.

 

You are forgetting mobile chips = binned, less voltage leak + reduced voltage = Reduced power draw

Here are some numbers that dispute your argument:
4790K @ 4.2GHz + Prime95 = 112W
4940MX @ 4.0GHz + Prime95 = 61W

 

It's at the top of the page. The P7xxZM thread has been checking chip TDP and they are about identical to mobile hardware. The only real difference is that versus the 4910MQ and the desktop CPUs, the 4910MQ will use a LOT less voltage at stock when clocked up.

He's asking about when clocked down for simple word processing etc. When clocked down, chips draw next to nothing:

 

Dude, look at the HWmonitor screenshot. CPU PACKAGE doesnt measure the whole computer, just the CPU. Of course it draw less when idling, but 15W is still a lot more than 4940MX idling (Around 3W).
EDIT: I cant read either. 9W it is. Still a big difference. Plus you are downclocking (undervolting ?) it, not running stock

Twist it anyway you want but desktop CPUs are not ideal if you want good battery life. One of many reasons why notebooks use binned mobile CPUs and not desktop CPUs

 

Uhh... lemme clarify a bit.

The desktop CPU didn't go below 1.2v at any time. It's not that you can't SET it to do so. But this test probably hasn't bothered to do so. Also, clocked up-but-idle chips draw more power and run hotter. I did check this before on my own chip.

Yes, package power is full CPU draw (uncore + IA cores + DRAM). I'll link two pics below showing the difference.

Spoiler

Basically what I mean is, if voltage is the same, clock speed is the same and system load is the same? They're gonna draw about the same amount of power. I'm sure I could get a 4790K to idle below 15W easy in a P770ZM.

If his desktop chip was "idling" at 4GHz with 1.2v or more, I could easily see it grabbing well over 20W load.

But you ARE right; out of the box, a desktop CPU is not configured for laptop usage. But that's what people like myself and Jaybee and such exist for =D.

 

Okay, battery aside, will a desktop processor be able to run Total War games any better than a 2.9ghz mobile processor? Wouldn't 2.9ghz be enough to run just about any game these days?

 

Its great that tools exist for changing CPU speeds and customizing the desktop CPUs the way you want. No doubt about that

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/246907-how-mobile-i7-cpus-work/
have a read. This should clear up anything else you need to ask about mobile CPUs

 

I read it, but I still don't understand how a desktop i7 haswell chip could possibly stay cool in a laptop when the mobile versions run so hot.

 

Because of the overly massive heatsink and fan setup for the new models. If you put an IHS on a mobile chip and put a mobile chip in that kind of cooling setup, they'd probably run even cooler due to using much less voltage on average.

Either way, the CPU cooling on the P170SM-A is pretty good. Much better than mine.

Also, this should clear up the "performance difference" question.

 

The P770ZM heatsink is monstrously awesome. That's why I can run p95 without throttling.

 

Hi I know its an old thread but I'm planning to upgrade my CPU and I was thinking to go for a 4810MQ.

But in your opinion it's really worth the extra $$ for a 4940mx? For planning to go between 3Ghz and max 4Ghz.

It does get annoying hot?

 

All Haswell gets hot. I upgraded from a 4900MQ to a 4940MX and didn't notice a bit of a difference. If I were you, I'd save the money, those extra 200 MHz. from stock turbo speeds on the 4940MX won't make a noticeable difference. Just put some Liquid Ultra on the CPU remember.

 

With an AW17 R1 and an 880M... is it a 240W PSU? If so I think the extra voltage for the 4930MX chips might draw a biiiit more power than you might care to have drawn if you OC it. But then I can't guarantee how the 4810MQ will OC.

 

Most 4810MQs can hit 4x4.0 GHz with Liquid Ultra.

 

Shouldn't need that on a AW17 R1.

 

So "keeping" the 240psu which cpu+vga card would recommend me?

And true I'm a little bit tired of my 880m hitting 93c or even 94c degrees...

 

A 970M would be a good idea, or a 980M maybe.

 

I would use Liquid ultra on all Hotwell processors regardless of laptop brand. But that's my opinion. I will never go back to a standard paste. Not even if I had the weakest Intel processor in my laptop/desktop. Never.

 

Thank you Papusan!
Would you recommend me to experiment with the new Liquid Copper or just go with Liquid Ultra like you said?

And about the cpu going from a 4710mq should I focus into find a 4930mx/4940mx or just a 4810mq will be enough to feel a bump in the overall system performance and maybe try to lock it at 3.8Ghz or even at 4Ghz?

 

Use Liquid ultra the best a man can get(have you read this before? )If you want an extreme then choose i7-4930mx. A better binned chip/ better overclocker than the newer Intel chip. This is tested/proven buy many. If you have the money run and buy. If not then see if you can get an cheap i7-4900mq. Why always think latest revision of the same chips is better?
Edit: Go from 4710 up to 4810 is a waste of money...

 

Yes the 4930MX is the best overclocker that's the CPU I would get actually

 

Either should he buy 4930 or a very cheap 4900. Go from i7-4710 to f. Eks i7-4800/10 is a waste of money. Liquid ultra and a Oc 4900/10 is also a good combination on an Aw17. I don't get that people want to buy the cheapest Intel chip. The same happens every time. After a while they want something stronger .

 

I don't really think that's the case that 4930MX is better than 4940MX. Its luck of the draw like all CPUs. If you can get a better deal on a 4940MX, take it.

 

I know it is the silicon lottery . But the best overclockers have shown to be 4930. You can't know what you buy before you try it. Then it's to late to regret the purchase. Alway safe than sorry But I am with you if the price is what matters. Chose the cheapest one.

 

All 4940MX chips I've ever heard of can do at least 4.3GHz given the right cooling. You can get a good or a bad chip in any tier. Buy whichever is cheaper.

 

True, I was very unlucky with my 4940MX on my previous Alienware 18 the max it could do stable is 4.1 GHz on all 4 cores. Papusan was able to do 4.4 GHz. on all 4 cores with his 4930MX. I also have seen many people with the 4940MX stating they cannot get a good overclock. Guess the chances of overclocking a 4930MX may be a bit better although at the end of the day, it's all a matter of luck. But remember the 4930MX is much cheaper so it's a better investment after all

 

There's a far lower pool of 4940MX chips out there to go by as well so that doesn't help. My 4940MX would go higher than 4.4GHz if Clevo had designed the board to handle higher voltage. I can't remember the exact voltage cut off but if you set the voltage to that number no matter the clock on my P377SM-A it immediately shuts the machine off.

Point is though that benching aside, 200MHz doesn't make a big difference either way. If we were talking 400 or 500 then yeah.

 

I read from you before praying about the Liquid Ultra but never about Liquid Copper only to recently realized its not 'liquid copper' but more like a "thermal paste"? Anyways I'll probably get Liquid Ultra

About the cpus thanks for the input I'll try to pass on the 4810mq and save for an 4930mx. Although strange you're saying that is better that the newer one (4940mx). I remember from the time of Sandy Bridge many people saying that the 2960xm was much more stable and better overclocker that the previous 2920xm

Anyways I'm intending to do an upgrade of cpu and gpu (probably 980m) without changing my 240 slim psu. I'm concerned about transportation when switching to a larger 330w psu...

 

Do not forget that Hotwell processors is off a lot more variable quality than previous Intel chips. It is not possible to compare Hotwell with former Sandy/Ivy. Also remember that many of Hotwell desktop processors are terrible overclockers. Some very good other slightly while many others are simply terrible overclockers. If you are going to run a decent Oc on a Hotwell extreme processor and gtx980m then it is not enough with a 240W psu. You must use a 330W. There are only two options and that is ultra Liquid / Liquid Pro. The problem with Pro is that this liquid is difficult to remove and apply in relation to Liquid Ultra. I've never tested Liquid Copper but I can not imagine that this paste is somewhat better than the average of good thermal greases. If you want a standard paste; The only choice is IC7, Gelid extreme and Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut. All other thermal paste's is a waste. The same if you go from 4710 up to 4800/10. Buy the cheapest extreme you can get or a cheaper 4900/10. If it's 4930 vs 4940 don't matter. You're never going to run standard Oc on 4.5-4.6ghz 24/7 anyway. That's the price that counts for you unless you are a number cruncher. The most important thing for your new cpu must be that the new processor can overclock a bit over stock speed without being unstable.. It's better with a Oc at 4.2ghz on all 4 cores than a processor running unstable on 4.4-4.5ghz perhaps only on 1 core. There are only 4 cores at full blast that counts .

 

Thanks once again for your feedback. I understand we can not compare Sandy/Ivy to Hotwells but I imagined the 2nd version of any product is "most of the times" better/made. I personally tend to have a 'thing' with end of cycle products. When I know they're not going to be made any more I rush and find a way to get them. That's how I got my A17-R1 the 30th of December 2014 a few days they took them out from the Alienware website.

One more question about the PSU as I'm concerned about possible travels. It is possible to have CPU 2 profiles: 1 overclocked at let's say 4Ghz (or 4.2Ghz max) using the 330w psu + 1 profile at stock clocks and using the 240w psu?

ps: Now going to track a 4930mx here in EU I wonder if I could get an OEM version

 

You say; In the condition we can not compare Sandy / Ivy two Hotwells but I imagined the 2nd version of any product is "most of the times" better / made. Did you forget Gtx780m vs 880m? Gtx780m is a much better overclocker and has not the same warm and throttling problem as Gtx880m.
You must learn to use Throttlestop/Xtu if you are going to overclock the processor. You can set up 4 different Oc profiles in Trottlestop and even more in Xtu. Throttlestop are the preferred (easy to switch between profiles with key commands and no bloatware as in Xtu).

 

Mr. Papusan with your answer you just..nailed it

Thanks for the input with Throttlestop, I'll dig into it. So hopefully a 4930mx + 330w psu will be my next purchases.

Are you positive in upgrading for a 980 Notebook (the P775DM version) into your A17 - R1? Or wait even till Pascal to upgrade?

 

Wow! on all 4 cores?? on max load stable?