E8435 = T9900? And is this a good price?

Is the E8435 exactly the same CPU as the T9900, just with a different name?

Both have 6mb L2 cache, both are 3.06ghz, both are socket P with the same FSB. Only difference is the TDP (35 vs 44/55), but is that TDP even true or just some intel advertising?

And lastly, is this a good price:
Intel Core 2 Duo Mobile E8435 3.06GHz CPU - eBay Intel, CPUs, Components, Computers. (end time 24-May-10 12:35:58 AEST)

 

They're generally much cheaper than the "official" T9xxx and P series CPUs, and also partly because they're made for the iMac desktops, that's why the TDP is much higher in the E8435 CPUs.

Yes it's true there are 2 types with different TDP, the E8435 is like the multiplier locked version of the X9100 with the same or higher 55W TDP.

If you want a good, and cheap CPU, a 35W TDP 2.93GHz E8335, aka T9800 should suffice - and if your notebook allows it, (I know you do that kind of stuff ) you can easily OC it to 3.5+ GHz or more steadily.

I installed an E8335 on my friend's Studio 1555 and it worked like a charm.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Intel-Core-2-Du...tem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3efdcc1008

 

this ebay item is a 44W TDP E8335 (SLAQC, stepping C0), better to get a 35W TDP E8335 SLGEB (stepping E0).

 

Fixed. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

i changed from 25W TDP P7450 to 35W TDP T9900 - i don't think i would be keen to push into a 44/55W TDP processor for heat reasons.

Altho i did change mobo at the same time to go from Ati 4530 GFX mobo to 4650 GFX mobo i reckon it added 10c higher temps under load.
Whether thats caused from processor alone i don't really know.

Before undervolting the T9900 could touch 90c

 

You're right that TDP is a load of crap and nothing can be really be based on those numbers alone.

In the case of the 8435 you linked to, as vostro1400user said, it is a C0 stepping penryn. It uses a tiny bit more power at the same voltages and clockspeeds as an E0 stepping processor, and an E0 stepping processor will be able to run at a lower voltage than a C0 at the same clockspeeds. I'm not really sure how these changes translate into actual power consumption because the only in depth comparisons between these two steppings are on the desktop in the context of overclocking. Also even between E0 stepping processors there is a difference. Later E0 stepping are superior to earlier E0 steppings (not too sure on the exact timeframe), but the difference is tiny if you aren't overclocking. Any E0 stepping pulled from an iMac will almost undoubtedly be an earlier E0 stepping right now.

My advice would be to wait for an E0 stepping 8435, although I'm sure the C0 would work perfectly fine with undervolting. The difference we are talking about here is far smaller than the difference between a Penryn and a Merom core. The price the 8435 you linked to is pretty hard to beat. I've never seen it even close to that low. My advice is to just look at the facts and decide for yourself.

 

i would just get the T9900.. you can find it quite cheap on hp spare parts store... anyways , IMO with BIOS issues and higer tdp , this processor isn't worth it... T9900 much better although theoratically , they're the same.

 

Have had an E8435 E0 that I bought off ebay since xmas and it's been working fantastically.

 

I have also a E8435 working in my Acer 8930 and i works well for me