Should I join the *club*

I finally saved up enough dough to upgrade the cpu in my p6860 and am wondering if I should join all you EXTREME users. So first of all would a x7900 (socket 478) processor be compatible, and is it worth upgrading for ~$275(used)? The most cpu intensive task for the laptop will probably be gaming.

 

u can count the games that actually depend on the cpu with ur fingers (mb a little more) omst games will rely on the gpu and not on the cpu.. a huge hyper mega processor wont help a weak gpu.

 

I mostly play Company of Heroes and Team Fortress 2. Also looking into getting Crysis. Was hoping to play it on high at native rez.

 

Of course...everyone wants to be a Cool Kid Club member. The Big League Chew discounts pay off almost instantly

And whether or not you should join... its more of a want than a need. No one really "needs" an Extreme CPU, but they sure are cool

I think the 7900 should work (at least it seems to) but i've only really ever seen people with the 7800 and the 9000, so you might want to get a second opinion

 

Either go for the X7800 or the X9000. The X7800 can reach its full potnetial, but the X7900 cant so its a waste. The X9000 will run much cooler so that is a major plus, as I am having cooling problems ATM, but it is my fault, nothing to do with the laptop.

 

x9000 is a bit too pricey for me.Why cant the x7900 reach it's full potential; it looks like a higher clocked x7800?

 

It's not worth it. You're wasting money. What are you trying to achieve anyways by upgrading your CPU? Better AutoCad work? Faster rendering?

You're not going to see a significant increase in performance gaming wise either.

 

I dunno. There are quite a few cpu bound games that I play. TF2, Company of Heroes, World in Conflict. I'm sure Crysis would benefit from a faster cpu too. Are you saying replacing my T5550(1.83) with a x7900 (let's say I oc to 3.0) wouldn't increase my frame rates at all? (in these games)

edit: Throw ut3 in there too, toggling bots on/off resulted in a difference of 20fps leading me to believe the cpu might have something to do with it.

 

Upgrade to a T9300/T8300, if on a budget.
The 0.5/0.6GHz increase per core with the X7800/X7900 will help you around with an extra 6-8 fps. (15 fps increase per Cycle, for most FPS games)

And the T9300 has 2MB more cache than the X7800, and 3MB cache = 1 cpu cycle = 15fps increase in games such as Doom 3, Quake 4 etc. So a 2MB extra cache, would help you with an extra 10fps. Not much, but the T9300 is cheaper than the X7800, and runs much cooler. (Figures are vague, since CPU usage varies from one game to another)

I don't think its worth the money, unless its the *club* thing for you. (If extreme, go for the X9000 - it undervolts better)

 

Compare the benchmarks in my sig, one is witht he T5450 and the other is with the X7800 at 2.8. In most games it made a difference, about 5-10 FPS, WIC doubled FPS, Crysis as well was smoother adding about 5 FPS, which is quite an upgrade in that game.

 

The temps of the T9300 are rock solid. If you are planning on being in the extreme club, go for the x9000. If money is a concern, then just wait till you have enough. In any case, the T9300 is no slouch!

 

To the guy saying CPU doesn't have an effect.... What!?!! is all I have to say.
Lets think. You've got to feed that GPU with something. It gets fed by the CPU. It's all about matching. the video card can outpace the stock CPU and run circles around it. With the x9000 granted it's way expensive, you will be getting more.

I'm not sure about Andy's reports on the cache having that big of an effect, but maybe.

 

6MB vs 4MB cache makes quite a difference in games that hammer the CPU. So, an extra 2MB Cache (X7800 vs T9300) should also provide a boost in fps, in games which actually utilize the CPU to >60% (e.g.s below).





EDIT: Sorry for hijacking with all the cache discussion....

 

Alright guys, i found a sweet deal for a T9300 $240 shipped. I think ill get it just wondering what the performance difference would be between it and a x7800/x7900. Would the differences in cache and clock speed cancel each other out leading to similar performace?


edit: also is there any way to overclock the t9300.

 

Have you not looked at my signature?

Of course it’s a matter of rather you can overclock the CPU in the machine you’re using, but even at default speeds, the T9300 is more than able to hold its own. Add another $100 to the price on the T9300 and you have a x9000 with the ability to overclock through the BIOS.

 

Ahh... didn't see that there. Wow what kind of temps do you get with it at 3 ghz. Nice oc.

 

I've seen it hit 48c when I was playing CoD 4, but I played a good 2 hours. My temps are pretty low anyway, so heat is not a factor for my unit. I will eventually do a volt mod, and see if I can push the 3.2GHz barrier stable, I want to get 12000 or better in 3DMARK06 with a single 8800GTX on a SR platform. But even when it’s not overclock, gaming and any other things are pretty good with the T9300 at default settings. I’ve yet to overclcok my GPU, don’t have the funds to replace anything especially not the GPU!

 

T9300 is beginning to sound better and better. So in conclusion if you (anyone feel free to respond) could have an x7900 or a t9300 which would you take.

 

What I mean is for the same price which would you pick. Need advice ebay auction ends soon!!!

 

for gaming purposes, the T9300 is more than enough to satisfy your thirst for frames.

if you were into high-end video/graphic rendering or anything of that nature, then i would recommend the x7900, as it has the higher clock speed.

and you can see what i picked (read sig) and i do a little bit of all 3

 

Aren't there better things to buy for $200+ instead of a processor that will increase your games' performance by a few frames?

 

for me....yeah, thats why im running raid 0. but you have to admit that a processor upgrade is very tempting to do on these machines as it is so easy to do.

only 66 more posts to go. i think imma hover at that # of posts for a while

 

Like what?

edit:Actually I guess I could buy some stock...but what's more fun x7900 or stock? I should start another thread.

 

Heretic!



I could buy a new dash frame for my '57 Belair with the money, but i figured having an x9000 in my computer was a more entertaining investment.

But that's the fun of disposable income, you can pretty much do what ever you want with it.

I could have bought a new car with what it cost to put the supped up 454 in my Belair, but I wanted the big block so I got it. Same with the x9000, I could have had another laptop with the money I'm dumping into my 6860... but I wanted the big block (the x9000) so I got it.

You really never need to do anything with your money, but spending it is fun. Plus Desktops are way more powerful than laptops so every little bit helps when a laptop is your main rig.

 

like what? +1

 

Anyone know if the T9300 is overclockable on the p6860?

 

it is not
only the x cpus can be o/c via bios up to 3.0ghz

 

You gotta love those who have absolutely NO experience with said processor, yet are so eager to advise of performance and/or value.

OP- To sum it up, either the T9300 or the X7800 are the recommended processor for this model. The x7800 has 4mb L2 cache and can be overclocked to 3ghz(Can go higher, but locked by current BIOS). Whereas the T9300 is 2.5ghz with 6mb L2 cache, but cannot be overclocked. Both are similar in performance and make quite a difference over the stock processor in pretty much everything.