Core 2 Duo SU9600 VS i5 430UM

Hi everyone!

I'm wondering if which of these ulv processors have a better performance and battery life.

The SU9600 has a 1.6 GHz clock speed, while the 430UM has a 1.2 GHz clock speedo and turbo up to 1.73 GHz.

Will the i5 offer a significant amount of difference of performance and increased battery life, or should I stick to the Core 2 Duo SU9600.

Thanks!

 

IDK about performance, but the Core 2 Duo will have a bit longer battery life. The TDP of the Core 2 Duo is 10 watts, while the i5 is 18 watts.

 

A comparison based on TDP is completely useless. (i) TDP doesn't provide an accurate measure of power consumption in real-life scenarios; (ii) the chipset for the i5 almost certainly draws less power than the chipset for the C2D. It's basically useless to look at just the CPUs given it's well-known that the i5 does many things which are done by a separate chip on the Penryn platform. You'd have to compare platform power consumption instead

 

The i5 will smoke the C2D and it will feel a faster in the windows desktop environment thanks to HT.

My i7 640 UM (same 1.2Ghz base clock) benchmarks about as fast as my T9500 (2.6GHZ).

You also need to consider that the i5 power usage includes the integrated video where as the SU9600 doesn't, but it surely has some sort of video device packaged along with the laptop. Also its 10 watts TDP vs 18 watts TDP. TDP isn't power usage.

 

the biggest battery drain in a laptop is the screen backlight.

everything else including the cpu is single digit percentage points.

 

I agree with this partially but newly refreshed notebooks with ULV Core I processors are getting less battery life than their ULV C2D predecessors (M11x, TM2, UL line) so joker's point is still valid.

 

^^ I haven't seen any data that does an apples-to-apples comparison of these two processors so not 100% sure.

 

Exactly, an example would be the Alienware m11x. The C2D version gets 7 hours, while the i7 version gets 5 hours of battery life. The TDP of the C2D in the r-1 m11x has a TDP of 10 watt, while the i7 in the r-2 is an 18 watt chip.

 

There have been a bunch of reviews of the M11x R1/R2, one of the UL30JT, and a couple of the TM2 that I have seen that show the SU7300 getting better battery life than the ULV Core I's

 

The SU9600 is a faster version of the SU7300 and could use more power though. At the same time the i5 430UM could use less power than the i5 520um or i7 640um in the M11x since its turbo boost is much more limited. I would think the i7 640um would use less power at 1.2GHZ vs 2.26GHZ.

 

The Core2 line still can't really be beat battery life wise... now performance wise, the i-Series will show them up every time. The Core2's were and still are GREAT processors, and still would serve many people quite well for a long time. I think once the 22nm production ramps up, you'll see the power savings everyone thought the i-Series was bringing. Especially 22nm ULV.

 

thanks all for your replies.

I guess I'll be going for the i5 ulv, as I don't mind the 2 hours loss of battery life.
5 hours is plenty for me.

Thanks again!

(but even more posts would be helpful)

 

Actually there will not be any noticeable difference in performance during normal computer usage. Only when you're running as CPU intensive job the i5 will be a bit faster.

I'd rather put my money where I actually notice it, an SSD.

True for larger notebooks, but for 10" netbooks the screen can draw as little as 2 watts when dimmed.

My HP DM3 with a 7200rpm hard drive gets about 7.5 hours battery life, with a Intel X-25v I got 9 hours. (surfing the web, wifi on, screen dimmed)

So even a little difference in power draw can cause significant differences.

 

I own a Sony TT with a SU9600. In high performance mode the processor seems to spend most time sat at 1.795ghz anyway. The real benefit is that the i5 will have a better chipset.

The TDP of the SU9600 is 10w and the chipset is 12w but in low power mode it is 7-8w. So a total of 17-18.

The 18W TDP for the 430UM includes the chipset also so TDP is roughly the same.

May be it is the extra threads/hyperthreading that makes it less power efficient or the heat.

Edited to add:

SU9600 CPU passmark 1391 @1.61ghz. I benched this.


i5 430UM is around 80 more so not much better, no.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/6391587-post883.html

 

The i5-430UM is faster. I upgraded from an SU9400 to i5-430UM and there is a great speed increase, but battery life is lost (I had the SU9400 undervolted). My Acer 3810t could potentially get 9 hours vs 6.5 my 1830t gets (I have an ssd). Photo editing in Corel Paintshop Pro X2 is noticeably improved performance wise with the i5. No slow loading images or slow saves anymore.

 

"when dimmed".........

Same thing can be said for the lightbulbs in my basement.

 

It's common practice to measure battery life with dimmed screen.

 

IMO , if ur after performance and don't mind some battery loss , get core i5.. if u want more battery life , core 2 is the way..

 

Hey, keep in mind the Core iX series the TDP includes the graphics and north bridge integrated. The Core 2 Duo ULV series at 10 TDP excluded the crappy 4500 graphics which took 12watts min.