Should I upgrade the Gateway 7811FX CPU to a T9300?

Hello all,

I could use some advice here:

I have a T9300 CPU that I installed in my 6831 FX which has the following stats:

Penryn
Speed: 2.50 GHz
FSB: 800 MHz Bus
Cache: 6 MB Cache
Power: 35W

The stock CPU in my 7811FX is:

P8400
Speed: 2.26 Ghz
FSB: 1066 MHz Bus
Cache: 3 MB Cache
Power 25W

The P8400 is a new chip with two added instructions I believe.


Which would be a faster CPU?

The T9300 is faster, with more cache, but on a slower bus consuming a bit more power.

The P8400 is slower with less cache riding a faster bus using less power.

However, I'm not sure the RAM can keep up with a 1066mhz which the larger cache would give me an advantage.

Any thoughts would be appreciated, thanks,
Kickstart

 

Dont get the T9300.. Get one of the P-series, such as p9600

 

P9600 won't be available untile next year. P9500 is available now for ~$370. T9600 is also available now for ~$570.

 

Sorry, thats what I meant. Get one of the refresher series CPUs.

 

I have a vista 32bit home premium. 4GB RAM but only 3 show. Thats probably known. I have a T7100 on my lappie and I too was thinking about going for a T9000 series. T9600 to be more precise. My question would be, what is the difference with P and T? Would gaming be better on a T than it would on a P? Alienware offers T9300, T9600 and Extreme on their 15.4 inch models. This is why I feel T is superior when it comes to gaming. But I have a Satellite A200 and heat is somewhat of an issue with my current chip. It runs pretty warm even at idle.

ALPHA

 

the difference between the P series and the T series processors are the power consumption. 25 watts for the P series, 35 watts for the T series.

As for the T7100, if the processor is a socket P processor, then you should be able to upgrade to the first generation penryn processors such as the T8100, T8300, T9300, T9500, and if you really wanted, the X9000 processor which has a 45 watt power consumption rating.

you would want to avoid the P8400, P8600, P9500, T9400, T9600, X9100, Q9100, and QX9300 processors as they have a 1066 mhz front side bus speed, and thus wont run at full speed due to the chipset limitation of 800 mhz front side bus speed.

 

I would consider that a downgrade. Do not get a T9300 over a P8400. You will be paying money for .24ghz more, which you won't even notice. Actually scratch that, you will notice more heat and less battery life because it's 35watt, and you might even notice lower speed because it's 800FSB.

 

Not true. The T9300 does provide a slight increase in GHz, but more importantly, 6MB of cache vs 3MB in the P8400. True, the T9300 FSB runs at 800MHz, compared to 1033 of the P8400, but most folks say that the memory speed bump is negligible. The T9300 beats the P8400 in all catagories here-> http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html except power consumption.

I would agree that I wouldn't get a T9300 over a P8400. I'd get a P9500 for only $40 more.

 

Get X9100.

 

Hahahaha definitely...if you have the cash

 

Well to be exact... the P8400 beat the T9300 in cinebench r10 single rendering, so it's 'not true' to say that the t9300 wins in all categories . Also, the extra cache will get you only about a 5% increase in performance on average. FSB will do way more, especially if he's ever interested in OC. Regardless, I wouldn't pay money for more heat, less battery life, and less FSB in exchange for .24ghz more and 3mb more cache. In fact I wouldn't take that for free. You are right that it ranks higher (not even by much), but ranking takes into account only its speed, not its power consumption or heat generation or cost-value, etc. Besides, you paid for Centrino 2, you have a 1066 capable chipset, putting in an 800FSB Cpu is simply a waste. Anyway, just one man's opinion.

If you're going to upgrade your CPU, get another P-series like the P-9500 or wait for the P-9600, or if you can afford it, get an X-series.

 

Definitely power consumption is better on the P8400 and it generates less heat. And that alone keeps me away form the T line.

But lets take a look at that cinibench score shall we? In 8 benchmarks, most samples scored around 2500 to 2800 and then there are two anomolies, at 4579 and 5414, both of which are better than the X9000. So, those last two tend to skew the average. The way notebookcheck gathers and reports their results leaves a lot to be desired, but their rankings are generally pretty good.

As for memory, there is plenty to consider there, too. Bus speed is just one factor. You also have to consider latency. And current 1066MHz memory typically has a higher latency than 800MHz memory at the same $$. And when you use 1066MHz memory on a 800MHz bus, you can usually use smaller latency values and so the benefit of the faster bus is marginal when using the same memory. But yes, the 1066MHz bus will allow you to take advantage of the expensive fast stuff, if you want to pay for it.

But before anyone makes a snap judgement about T9300 vs P8400. The big question really should be, why would you want to? Do you plan on overclocking? Are there things that run on your old system with the T9300 that run slower on the 7811FX? Have you been presented with a great deal on a T9300? What are your requirements? Staying with the P8400 is free (it's already in your laptop), uses less power and runs cooler. So why would you want to upgrade? And if you do want to upgrade, the P9500 is a better option for not much more $$ (or go the X-route if money is no option)

 

cough cough... BMW135i is selling his.

 

true, thats what it all comes down to