The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    Difference between processor speeds

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by bball3212, Jan 4, 2010.

  1. bball3212

    bball3212 Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    bball3212, Jan 4, 2010
    #1
  2. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    The 2.6 GHz Core 2 Duo is twice as fast as the 1.3, but only during CPU intensive applications.

    During normal usage (office, web, watching video, listening music) there is no difference.
     
    Phil, Jan 4, 2010
    #2
  3. DEagleson

    DEagleson Gamer extraordinaire

    Reputations:
    2,529
    Messages:
    3,107
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    116
    That cpu is part of the Intel CULV platform, that boast better battery time.
    And it also includes the Intel GMA 4500mhd that can do gpu decoding of H.264 encoded video and also Flash with Adobe Flash 10.1. (But im not really sure)
     
    DEagleson, Jan 4, 2010
    #3
  4. surfasb

    surfasb Titles Shmm-itles

    Reputations:
    2,637
    Messages:
    6,370
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    205
    I wouldn't exactly list the Flash benefit. Because it looks like existing flash videos have to be re-coded to benefit from GPU acceleration.
     
    surfasb, Jan 4, 2010
    #4
  5. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    Yes it can.
     
    Phil, Jan 4, 2010
    #5
  6. Explosivpotato

    Explosivpotato Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    15
    Messages:
    296
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    The core architecture is the same, so they should perform similarly clock-for-clock.

    In other words, it will be roughly 1/2 as fast as a 2.6 in any task that taxes the CPU. Good battery life though.
     
    Explosivpotato, Jan 4, 2010
    #6
  7. Convoluted

    Convoluted Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    74
    Messages:
    690
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    I was doing a bit of comparison a while back with my Macbook Pro (P7550 2.26GHz) and my Asus UL30 (SU7300 1.3GHz). According to the following page, the P7550 scores a 1667 points, whereas the SU7300 scores 995 using Passmark CPU Mark. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php

    So the P7550 is not quite 2X as fast for processor intensive tests.
     
    Convoluted, Jan 4, 2010
    #7
  8. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    I think it's working for older videos as well. I can play Asteroid HD with about 60% CPU load on a SU2300.

    Unfortunately that list is not so accurate any more for several reasons. One of them is Windows 7 gives different scores than Vista and XP. Same story for 32 vs 64 bit.
     
    Phil, Jan 4, 2010
    #8
  9. surfasb

    surfasb Titles Shmm-itles

    Reputations:
    2,637
    Messages:
    6,370
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    205
    I'm sure hoping I'm wrong about this.
     
    surfasb, Jan 4, 2010
    #9
  10. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    Phil, Jan 4, 2010
    #10