Difference between quad core and i7

ANd that does not make a difference.**
The difference lies in the 64bit bandwidth of the GPU vs. the 128bit bandwidth.
You intend to game on the laptop?

**Above 512MB is hard that a GPU can utilize full GDDR. Basically it can use double the bandwidth, so a 64 one, could use 128MB and a 128 could use 256MB. The only exceptions are faster GDDR5 cards, and when the GPU has huge amounts of things to render, then it utilizes the extra memory better, if not, it is the same.

 

Definitely it's gonna be used as a gaming laptop!

 

Then the higher the GPU the better.
Have you filled in the FAQ in the What Notebooks should I buy Forum?
I cant remember reading if you had a budget, cause the Sager NP6890 uses a GTX280M and an i7, but it is pricey

 

What games? Most games prefer a stronger GPU (256-bit) and can run the same with a lesser CPU, since the CPU doesn't bottleneck it. If it's just for gaming, you don't really need an i7 and I would rather put the money to a high end GPU instead.

 

i7 would be ideal for anyone and everyone into RTS games.

also, games like GTA4 greatly benefit from the stronger CPU because of all the AI wandering about.

 

Turbo or not, get over it. Stop using clockspeed as a legitimate benchmark.

Clockspeeds died a long time ago with the intro of Athlon 64.

 

Well, $1,500.00

 

I will never buy a C2D processor, some new dual-core Mobile processors will be available this year though core i5 and core i7, still I will not buy a dual-core processor just to get a better GPU ATI is not that bad I guess.

 

Then if you want gaming with i7 and 256 GPU, raise your budget.
The only ones that offer that now are the Sager NP!690, the Alienware M15x and the HP Eny 15, in that order. Now, the Asus M60j with GT240M could do it and the MSI with GT240 or 250....... Both use i7.

 

C2D are not bad at all. Instead gams run exttremy well on C2D anddd considering that you can have a gaming rig for 1K and a 256 card, they are worth it. Unless you are dong some CPU intensive work, the i7 is not worth it now. Perhaps later down the road when Arrandale comes out...s

 

Dayum they are expensive! hummmm okay .. can i get a q9000 and 256 GPU for $1,500.00 or less?

 

A basic NP8662 from Xotic with just the processor upgraded to a Q9000 comes just over 1500 with cash discount...

 

Maybe I will have to wait for Arrandale it should be released q4 2009

 

Do you need the laptop now?
If not, then you can afford to wait, if you need it now, then a high C2D or C2Q will do just fine.

 

Nope but I don't want a C2D, If I couldn't find a C2Q or i7 laptop with a 256 bit GPU for $1,500.00 or less then I'll have to wait for Arrandale

 

What is your current CPU?

 

Asus G51? Anything from XoticPC?

 

well , kinda nothing I sold my desktop and my laptop and borrowed a laptop from a friend.
that's crazy but I wanted to buy a good laptop instead of having a desktop and a laptop

 

Nothing under 1500 I guess

 

Yo, check this out (About i7-720QM)
From:[email protected] "TestoIntel(R) Core(TM) i7 Mobile Processor Email Support Request"
"The Processor Base Frequency is 1.6GHz, up to 3.28GHz with Intel(R) Turbo Boost Technology. You may verify this in http://www.intel.com/Consumer/Learn/Notebook/corei7-detail.htm#proc-num"
"all 4 cores can be runnig at up to 3.28GHz with the Intel(R) Turbo Boost Technology."
So what the hell is that? Is it true?

 

THAT is a typo!
Correction, a MASSIVE typo.

i7-820QM 4 Cores / 8 Threads 1.73 GHz, up to 3.06 with turbo boost 8 MB 45 nm
i7-720QM 4 Cores / 8 Threads 1.60 GHz, up to 3.28 with turbo boost 6 MB 45 nm

 

But look that was Intel customer care!
Even more they claimed that the 4 active cores can be boosted to 3.28GHz at the same time!

 

Hmm.. interesting posts, I learned alot from you guys instead of reading the reviews, more fun to read people's input than robotic articles. LOL
Thanks.

 

I agree, that's one of the best threads ever.
Actually that's my first time to participate in a thread, I do know a lot about computers but many people here know more than me and everybody has a different opinion and a point of view.
This thread is really useful

 

If you want to learn a tad more about CPU's I have a guide in my link about the topic. It is simple, but goes thru all the basics and differences.

It is simply wrong. No questions asked. How could the slower one reach higher clock speeds? Using the FOUR CORES?!?! Then why pay for the 920XM them if the cheapest outruns it by 1.0GHz the four cores?

Intel 720QM runs at 1.6 four cores, 1.73 if needed the four. 2.4 two cores. 2.8 1 core.

 

and 1.73 if 3 cores are used, yeah that's what I saw on this link http://download.intel.com/design/processor/specupdt/320767.pdf
but I got that e-mail from Intel customer support just a couple of hours ago, actually it is a series of e-mails I send them an e-mail and get a reply everyday.
and you can see that too on Intel's website here http://www.intel.com/Consumer/Learn/Notebook/corei7-detail.htm#proc-num
Can we sue them?

 

Under what?
Misinformation?
You would only get some stranger fired...

 

I don't know maybe we can get some free cash
Is there a possibility that the info here http://download.intel.com/design/pro...pdt/320767.pdf is wrong too?
I mean do you know somebody who did use that processor and tell us how it really works?

 

Page not found for the link provided.
That must be a typo. The only i7 reaching that speed it the 920XM on single threaded apps

 

my mistake http://download.intel.com/design/processor/specupdt/320767.pdf
search for i7-720QM

 

Now, that is correct on page 16.

 

Can I boost 2 cores to 2.4 and use the other two without boosting (1.6) at the same time?

 

I dont think so...the TB kicks in when there is overhead for overclocking, if not, it doesnt.
That being said, when running four cores, the CPU can max out at 1.73 the four cores (note I use the word core, rather than thread, since I dont know if TB and HT are fully compatible...I think they are, but no sure).
The TB only uses up to the max the CPU can handle, so if you are running 2 ar 2.4, then the other 2 are shut down.

 

Yes, I think the TB and HT are compatible.
Guess what, I have just chatted with Intel Live Chat support and they confirmed the error on there website but the assistant told me that the four used (active) cores of the i7-720QM can be boosted to 2.8GHz (at the same time). argh

 

If that is true, then me wants even more now...He must probably be mistaken by the HT+TB thing.
1 core at 2.8, 2 at 2.4

Know what, give me till end of Nov, and I will personally tell you how it works.

 

Yea thats a lie, cause mine does not do that.

I have 4 cores at 2.67

2 Cores at 3.0

and 1 core at 3.4

 

Really? That is nice of you (yes please!) and such a relief I'm really tired of Intel's website and Intel customer support whether the e-mail or the chat support.
They are so stupid.
So would you like me to contact you by the end of November or should I give you my e-mail and let you contact me?

 

you have a i7-720QM?
if the 2.8 isn't right but you just said 2.67 does that mean the first, second, third and fourth core are boosted to 2.67GHz each?

 

Look at Narsnail's signature; he was talking about the way his desktop I7 CPU turboboosts, not the I7 720QM. He was demonstrating that it doesn't turboboost all 4 cores simultaneously to the maximum OC, only does that when one core is running.

 

Find me here at the Forums. Shoot me a PM or something, and mostly around.
If you are not going to remember this, send me a PM now with your email, and I will reply ASAP.

 

narsnail, I don't know how you got those numbers but:

The desktop i7 920 Turbo is

2.66GHz base
2.8GHz quad max
2.93GHz single max

Nothing more, nothing less.

 

The i7 is my Wish List Chip & has been for some time. But I gotta live within my means.

Anyone who can go there, I would so go there.

Jill

 

I think he is talking about a different processor (definitely not i7-720QM)

 

Yes, as I said in my post #139; Narsnail is talking about the i7 desktop processor he owns, i.e. the one in his signature... he was simply pointing out the turbo boost function's pattern of behaviour in relation to multiple cores that is common to all i7 CPUs.

 

My motherboard has an extreme overclock turbo mode function, so it clocks even farther than spec'ed to.

 

The point was before that my processor does not overclock all four cores when they are in use, unless I manually do it through the BIOS. I using my actually first hand experience with the i7 line to contribute to the discussion, unlike all of you.

It may be mobile, but the only real differences between the 920 and the 720QM is a much lower TDP and clock speed. Most likely will be smaller than the desktop chip.

I just posted my turbo-boost speeds to futher combat the point that the i7 line doesnt OC all four cores unless done manually through the BIOS, and someone decided I was lying and should say im wrong, not sure what I have to prove by lying.

 

Totally got where you were coming from, Nars; just that ahmedhesham3 thought you were talking about your experience with the 720QM.... would've been amazing if you had managed to OC that to 3.4GHz!!!

Sorry for the misunderstanding

 

Thanks for calming this thread.
I was ready to start reporting things...lol
NOT!

But seriously, thanks narsnail for the input. That proves that i7 CANNOT overclock the four cores to the max all together! No four cores at 2.8 on the 720.

 

No worries, cant say I am in a particularly awesome mood today, so sorry for the snippyness. My turbo-boost speeds are not exactly stock, but it indeed heats up my system a lot, as great as it would be to have the mobile line that high, it would just not work out due to TDP and other factors.

 

It can activate Turbo Mode with 4 cores, but its not very high.