A really weird question.

If you don't know anything about me you will soon find out that when I build or buy a PC I plan on keeping that said PC for a very long time, future proof if you will. The more I think about me getting a notebook PC the more I think, I really would like to get a much faster processor, so I was going with the T9300, not bad it's fast and is the new 45 nm processor. But the more I think about it the more I want to get the Intel X9000, not because it's really fast but because it's unlocked. You see I was thinking more along the lines of under clocking the CPU, yes I said under clocking, I mean I won't need all that power but it would be nice to know that I have it if I need it. Plus I will be getting some extra money around June, so I thought that would be perfect. Does this idea seem crazy?

 

I for one don't think you are making much sense. If you can afford top of the range, then just go for it and enjoy it. No point paying for premium goods and then modding it to mediocre quality.
Alternatively you could buy a mediocre system now and invest the extra cash somewhere (omg stock market), so that in a year or two when you feel like upgrading to that new OctCore CPU, you can just sell your current system and you will have enough cash to buy it.

 

Sure makes sense if you want to do. But very expensive, sure you can't better spend or save that money?

 

I honestly don't see the point. Underclocking is done dynamically these days anyway to reduce heat output which is the only valid reason for underclocking anyway. If you waste your money on the X9000 at least keep it at stock speeds.

I'd just get the T9300.

 

The think is, I want to keep what little battery life I may have with this beast of a machine. I know it sound weird because most people think, "wow his laptop pc can do 2.8 and probably go over 3.2 without breaking a sweat but he is only running it a 2.4!". To be completely honest I don't want the speed right now. But when I start doing really heavy CPU intense applications then it is a really nice thought of knowing that I have it. I am not really building this for speed benchmarks or to pat myself on the back for making a monster of a notebook PC but this will have to last me 4 to 6 years. Like I said I build future proof, just like my desktop which is 4 years old and can still handle almost anything I throw at it. Like I said I know it sounds dumb and I normally wouldn't go so high on the CPU chart but I will be coming up with some money that isn't tied down to anything so this to me just seems like a wise choice in keeping my notebook future proof.

 

I don't know why I didn't see your post, but to answer your question. By the time June comes around I will have already upgraded everything I wanted to upgrade on this notebook, except the CPU.

 

When those Extremes come out I am going to get a sticker off Ebay and paste it over my AMD one. Unlike you I am into showing off but have a very low budget.

 

perfect example of why you should not post drunk or souped or 14

 

This wasn't a look at me thread. I just wanted to know what others thought of this. I kind of knew what to expect but I wanted to see if there were any others out their that might understand and think like I do. Yes, I am buying a desktop replacement but I will be traveling with it from time to time, meaning I am concerned over battery life. Under clocking a CPU to a more manageable speed would help battery life but when I need extra juice and am near an power outlet then I will unleash the CPU and probably go a little over for it to handle what I need it to handle more quickly. I know I am spending a lot of money on speed I will not use all the time, but I look at it like this, I only upgrade and buy PC parts once every 4 to 5 years, when I do I get what I want so I don't regret anything down the road. I am sure the quad core cpus are amazing and they come out soon, I think, but I really don't need that. And to be honest if I wait for the next best thing then I will be waiting my whole life.

 

honestly if u wanna be future proof, buy a quad core notebook like i did
i bought a Q6600 2,4ghz, nowadays programs are slowly getting more multi-threaded, and itll will only get more complex as more cores show up, so get a quad core if u want to be future proof

 

You raise a very good point but I was one of the first in line to get a dual core processor when they first came out for desktops. I don't regret it now but back then I did. I had so much trouble running certain things that I almost shipped the CPU back and got a single core. But I need to ask the question, since more programs are multi-threaded supportive would that mean that I wouldn't have any problems with the quad-core? I guess what I am asking is, are programs limited to how many cores it can support?

 

yes, most programs are limited, and can usually only support 2 cores max, thats how they were coded, same with games alot of them only support 2 cores max, but there are a handful of programs that support quad-cores and its growing every year

about the stability and compatibility, the quad core runs great, since multi-cores are the standard now, there really isnt much of a compatibility issue, i

talking back when single cores jumped up to dual cores ,of course there would be compatibility issues, because your going from single threaded aplications to multi-threaded and thats a HUGE upgrade/jump, the codes simply couldnt support/recognize it, so you would have 1 core just sitting idle, but nowadays since dual core is the standard, alot of programs can use 2 of the cores for the program of your choice and use the other two cores for somthing else

 

It sounds tempting and I may go for it depending on price. Because I am guessing that quad core cpus aren't socket P compatible. If they are and the notebook I am getting can support it and they aren't too far from the X9000 price point then I will definitely go for it. But I will have to do a little more research on the quad core before making a final decision.

 

well if you wait for a few months they will be coming out with the Q9xxx series 45 nm quadcores codename "yorkshire", that and the current quadcores are about $600-700 cheaper than the Extreme series Dual cores
the extreme series processors are wayy overpriced, better to save your money, and spend it on a better gfx card. more hd storage and ram

 

Masterbassist,

What notebook do you have and what is the Chipset that is in it that you can put a Intel® Core™2 Quad Processor Q6600 in it?

I was thinking that we would not see Intel® Core™2 Quad Mobile Processor Technology until 32nm architecture is on the market in 2009or later.

I am Core 2 Extreme(ly) curious!!!!!!!!!

 

I completely understand. It's peace of mind for a time.

If we only get what we need...... We consistently need more and more. I for one, do not have the time and energy to be upgrading spuradically.

Go Big.... and it will be awhile before 'that' Big isn't big enough.

One thing does confuse me though. Understand the under clock motivation in to save power, but it was my inderstanding that recent processor that automatically. I wil have to go back and find my source.

 

its the sager np9262
they pretty much stuck the desktop processor in a notebook, added arctic silver compound and 4 fans

batterly life is horendus, but its really supposed to be a mobile desktop replacement (oxymoron)

 

Yes most CPUs do it automatically, but under clocking gives me some control. Basically if I can max the CPU at 2.0, that means the CPU can't go over that regardless, no matter what I do. But if I let the CPU decide what speed to run at then it could go over that speed and defeat the purpose of me trying to save battery life.

 

Alright, if the battery life is horrendous, then my decision to get a quad core is no. I still need to travel with this thing and I know I won't be able to find a power outlet everywhere I go.

 

I checked it out. The Sager NP9262. That is qute a machine. I knew that they would have had to do something to keep it cool enough. The four fans is impressive. 3 hard drives is insane.

I was looking at the Area-51® m9750, but I was disappointed with it's processor options. HP and Dell have better.

I could not put a Quad Core in the Gateway P-171X FX Edition that I am getting, unless I had a nitrous oxide notebook cooler.

 

You're getting the notebook above mine. Actually I was thinking of getting that same one you are getting but I don't think the screen resolution and CPU really is worth the extra cost, especially since I am upgrading the CPU anyway.