Dell Precision M4400 - T9600 -> QX9300 upgrade - battery life difference at idle?

I'm considering upgrading the processor in my Dell Precision M4400 to a QX9300, and I have a few questions regarding the upgrade since I keep getting conficting results while trying to search for the information myself.

1. Will I notice a severe decrease in battery life? I am planning on using a custom power mode that keeps the CPU downclocked while on battery.

2. If I get an ES processor, what will be the odds it will be without temperature sensors? I've heard this is a risk with ES/QS models.

3. What are some of the other significant hardware-related risks when it comes to getting an ES processor?

4. Where, besides eBay, can I get a good deal on such a processor? ($450 or less, ES or not)
I'm not opposed to eBay, but if I can find a better deal elsewhere then that would be nice.

 

The only one i can help you on is the price. $410 plus shipping

Intel Core 2 Extreme Mobile QX9300 2.53GHz ES QS QGNG | eBay

 

INTEL CORE QUAD Q9200 2.40GHZ- QAVR - better than Q9100 | eBay UK

Much better option.

Have you checked your motherboard/cooling accepts quads?

Yes it increases power consumption, the cores are made from higher quality silicon so each core doesn't consume as much, but there is double the amount of silicon.

If you get the one I listed or the same stepping else where it will have a temp sensor.

No the stepping above will not cause hardware damage.

 

There is no point in paying huge premiums for CPU upgrades to an old laptop IMO. Instead sell your laptop for $700, put the CPU upgrade fee ($400) on top of it and may be a few bucks more and get yourself a SandyBridge laptop.


--

 

When a q9000+ will do everything and more for 99% of users mobile needs, why spend 1000 when you can spend a fraction and upgrade a laptop you like and already have? Sure synthetic benchmarks will prove sandy bridge is fatser, and rightfully so as its almost 3 years newer. But the core 2 quad are venerable chips and very potent at crunching numbers.

 

except I bought this laptop refurbished about a month ago for the 1920x1200 15.4" RGBLED screen. It cost more than $700. I'm holding off on 16:9 until 2048x1152 makes its way to laptops. It's doing pretty much everything I need it to, I'd just like it to perform a bit faster in CPU-intensive games (Shadow rendering benefits from the CPU). I'm not much of a heavy gamer, but I'd also like to see a benefit in other multithreaded applications without too much compromise in the way of single/dual-threaded apps such as Dolphin (Wii emulator) which is why I'd like something a bit faster than a Q9000.

I won't have to end up paying too much for the CPU upgrade in the end, because I already got a great deal on the T9600 I currently have installed (laptop came with P8600 which I still have), and I'm going to sell it for a bit more than I bought it for in order to get the upgrade. A Q9200 also sounds like a good compromise between price and power, but can anyone confirm it will be compatible with the M4400?

 

If the q series is compatible the q9200 will work. Its for those who want a qx9300 but dont have the cash. In my opinion you wont notice the difference between a q9300 or q9200 in real world use.

 

It should work if you can fit QX series. I wouldn't suggest the Q9200 as it might not work in your laptop as dells are fussy about CPU's. I suggest you try for a QX9300 even if its more expensive. Also get some good thermal paste for your CPU. QX9300 should run hotter so it should help. Other than that , your set.

 

I've already got Arctic Silver 5 in it since the P8600 -> T9600 upgrade, and I still have plenty of leftover paste in the tube so that's what I'll be using.

But yeah, it's either Q9200 or QX9300, I can't afford to settle for the low 2.26GHz clock speed on the Q9100 due to some of the single-threaded tasks I run.

 

You can use throttlestop on the Q9200 and QX9300 to change their frequency.

Mine runs at the minimum possible voltage on a core 2 quad (1.05v) at 2.66ghz, so runs a bit faster and uses less power than stock.

Or I can still use less voltage than the stock and get to 3.06ghz.

At which point its as fast as a sandy bridge notebook.

 

I'm about to buy the Q9200. I know the chipset is compatible but I'm worried the M4400's BIOS won't have it whitelisted, and I'll be stuck with a $240 ES processor I can't sell in the NBR Marketplace.

Can anyone tell me whether or not they think it'll be compatible?

 

I did basically the same thing your considering doing, but with an i5 to i7 in a Latitude E6410.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/del...48126-dell-latitude-e6410-i7-720qm-works.html

 

Can't be sure unless someone else has tried.

Can you find a supplier who will let you return it?

 

Here's what the Dell Tech Support Rep told me in an email after talking with tech support on the phone:

 

I can run my q9200 at 3.2 GHz @ 1.1750 btu don't plan on running Prime95 as the system will overheat and shut down. I can prime 95 2.93 GHz but it is right on the edge, just a bit warmer in the room would probably tip it over in Prime95.

I am the same 2.66 at floor 1.0500 and 2.93 GHz @ 1.1250 if that helps. While I am sure even idle at 1.6 GHz with power saver it still uses quite a bit more than theP8400, P9600 or even the x9100 I had...........

 

I have to save thermal room for my gfx card otherwise 3.06ghz would be easy lol.

I can do 2.93 : 1.1v

 

I found 1.100 runs but Prime95 errors on me so I bumped it. Same with 3.2 Ghz at 1.1750 as I can run lower but again errors with Prime95. Fortunately I have a dual cooling solution but it still is now where near enough to handle masive OC's on the quads. It was good enough for the C2D's as the x9100 would even run 4.0 GHz (non extented Pirme95) and 3.7 GHz with Prime95........

 

I just got confirmation from one of the eBay sellers (selling 70+ QAVR's) that they have sold to many M4400 and M6400 customers, so I went ahead and got one.

I'll report back on compatibility!

 

Yep mine are tested with prime 95 too.

 

just copper shimed the CPU and NB. I was able to do 2.93 GHz @ 1.1000 for 4 minutes but then an error in prime95. had to bump back to 1.1125. It did last alot longer than before though, it used to error in the first minute then.............

 

Well I just got the Q9200 today and installed it, and it works!

Based on what BatteryBar is reporting, it appears to be drawing roughly the same amount of power at idle as the P8600 and a bit less than the T9600. It's showing power draw for the entire system as in the ballpark of 19W-25W.

Here's a CPU-Z screen:

 

hmz, I would not trust a program to be accurate. However nice =)

 

Here are my Windows 7 Experience Index scores. CPU is up from 6.0 for the P8600 and 6.4 for the T9600.