Core 2 Duo T5500 v T7100 - how different?

Hi,

I'd just about made up my mind to buy an Asus F3SE with the T7100 cpu when the dealer suggested I consider another model (F3JP) with the T5500.

Am I likely to see much difference in the machines, which I want to use for photoediting?

The machine specs are:

F3SE
Core 2 Duo T7100 (1.8GHz)
HDD 120 GB (5400)
ATI mobility radeon x2500

Cost with 1GB RAM upgrade 840 pounds


F3JP

Core 2 Duo t5500 1.66GHz
HDD 160GB (5400)
RAM 2GB already
ATI mobility radeon x1700

Cost approx 780 pounds.

I am going to have the dealer put Windows XP on machine instead of Vista.

Thanks for any advice.

 

The T7100 is almost equal to the T5600 in performance so you will notice an improvement.
For photo editing the GPU's also matter, which means that we should know the difference of Radeon 2500 HD and X1700, sadly we haven't got a clue about the 2500 HD so we should wait for now.

If the laptops are coming with Vista pre-loaded, meaning that you already have been charge for the price.You should either try to find a config. that comes with XP pre-loaded or you should do a fresh installation and install the drivers yourself (Some Vista laptops don't seem to have XP drivers)

 

I don't think the GPU makes any difference for photo editing. The computer is just processing what are effectively a bunch of numbers. There' s nothing 3D in photo editing.

And I think that you would need a stopwatch to see the difference between a T5500 and a T7100 unless you have processes which run for 10 seconds or more.

If it were my decision I would go for the less expensive computer with the bigger HDD.

John

 

Thank you both for replying - I think I'll go for the cheaper model then.

 

Save the money and go with the T5500.

People often think that a processor upgrade will make a big difference when in fact the processor sits idle over 90% of the time waiting for the rest of the system to give it a task. Unless you're using a program that HEAVILY crunches a lot of data or numbers (like a Boinc project), the processor won't make much difference to overall performance. You need about 3-4x the speed increase to feel a difference.

If you're unsure, go to a big chain store like CircuitCity or BestBuy and play with all the various models with different processors and video chips. For most tasks you won't notice much difference between the fastest and slowest models (assuming that they're running properly).

For photo editing any current system will do, if it has enough memory to load the graphics. Memory is usually more important than video and processor speed. I use the full version of Photoshop on my laptop with 2GB of memory, a T5500 and a built-in Intel GMA 950 video chip. I have no performance issues here altering 10mp images from my DSLR, although I don't get carried away with layers or too many changes at once. For really large images more memory would be better, and a faster video chip to render quicker, but I find this system is more than enough.

Gaming is a different story since it relies heavily on a good video chip and some CPU horsepower. For your needs, you probably don't need the extra processor speed or video chip. The battery life might be a tad better with the T5500 and x1700 too (I don't think the T7xxx series does any better with power management).

Why take a step backwards with XP? Vista has a few issues, but they're generally not a big deal and it's a better operating system from the end-user point of view. It took me a little while to get used to the new look and feel of Vista, but after using the beta versions for a few weeks I couldn't go back to XP, it really is a better system (what XP should have been). I waited for new laptops to appear with Vista before buying.

And as long as you have 1GB or more of memory, Vista runs just fine on most hardware. I'd only go with XP if I had a specific device that was not compatible with Vista and could not get updated drivers because it's too old.

 

Thanks, KSC. I'll go with the cheaper model. As for Vista, I'd heard that there were still quite a few glitches with it so that's why I thought XP might be best for now.

 

About the Video-editing, are you going to do any decoding/edcoding ?
If you are, the GPU will make a difference :
Because the GPU will help in the encoding/decoding part.(And it seems that some 2000 HD GPUs will have major improvements in this area too)
But if it's just editing without decoding/encoding, John is totally right.

 

I think the T7100 has an 800 FSB compared to the 667 FSB of the T5500.

Josh

 

About the Video-editing, are you going to do any decoding/edcoding ?
If you are, the GPU will make a difference :
Because the GPU will help in the encoding/decoding part.(And it seems that some 2000 HD GPUs will have major improvements in this area too)
But if it's just editing without decoding/encoding, John is totally right.
__________________

Hi again,

I have to confess that I don't know what is meant by encoding/decoding videos. Primarily I just edit photos taken with a digital camera and very occasionally I shoot small video sequences on it.

You'll probably all groan now but what is the difference between CPU and GPU? I have concentrated solely on asking the dealers about CPU, RAM, memory cards and HD size when trying to compare machines. Shoild I have been asking about GPU too?

 

The F3JP is available even cheaper here. I dont mind being given the difference in price for finding that for you lol. joke.

I would agree with everyone else, the t5500 has more than enough power for almost all users. The 2GB ram in the f3jp will give better performance anyway.

 

Thanks, radditz, I'll check out laptops direct.