Intel ULV-SU4100 or Intel ULV 2700

Looking at a Lenovo U350 with an ULV SU4100 dual core processor and an Acer Timeline 3810t with a ULV 2700. From my understanding the SU4100 is a dual core processor wheras the 2700 is a single core processor. This would mean that the Su4100 is much faster being that it has two cores. The Lenovo contains this processor and is only $45 more than the Acer model. So if my reason is correct I should go with the Lenovo because it has better performance. Is this correct? here are the specs:


ALSO -- Is it also valid that the Su2700 is a slower and older model?



Lenovo IdeaPad U350 2963
P SU4100 / 1.3 GHz ULV - RAM 3 GB - HDD 320 GB - GMA 4500MHD - Gigabit Ethernet - WLAN : 802.11b/g - Windows 7 Home Premium - 13.3" Widescreen TFT 1366 x 768 with a 4 cell lith ion battery

Acer Timeline 3810t
* 1.3GHz Intel Pentium Processor SU2700
* 4GB (2x2GB) RAM
* 320GB Hard Drive
* Intel GMA 4500MHD Graphics
* 13.3" LED Backlit Widescreen Display
* Integrated Webcam and Microphone
* 802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi
* Windows Vista Home Premium (64-bit)
* 3.5 lb

 

The SU2700 and SU4100 are more or the less the exact same thing... except that the SU2700 has one core disabled. They're both based on the Penryn core and neither is really older than the other. Either way, I'd probably take the 4100 over the 2700, but if all you're doing is browsing and word processing, even the 2700 should be sufficient.

 

But still , 2 cores are going to be better than 1 core so get the Su4100..

 

thanks. can the su2700 still play music and hd video smoothly? is the su4100 far superior in this aspect?

 

Music, yes, HD video, I don't know. Concerning HD video, though, you can accelerate that on the X4500, so in theory it should be a non-issue. So no, I wouldn't say the 4100 is far superior.

 

If you're only doing single core stuff and never anything that'll tax a cpu then the SU2700 should be enough, but it won't be much more powerful than an Atom cpu for a lot of tasks (and prob less powerful than dualcore atoms). Fortunately there's the x4500 to help with some media stuff, which is far better than GMA950, but still that's not saying much.


If you don't plan to do much with it - SU2700
If you want some level of futureproof / longevity I'd suggest SU4100 though

 

ok thanks. are there any benchmark tests comparing the two processors? from what i understand now the 4100 is slightly better than the 2700 but not by much because they are very similar

 

As far as I know the 4100 is a dualcore version of the 4100, so with same cache the 2700 would only be better at single core tasks. Anything dual-thread+ would be better with SU2300/SU4100/SU7300 or better

 

u mean the 4100 is a dualcore version of the 2700. and what do dual thread tasks consist of? would this be things such as music and watching movies

 

Let's cut to the chase. Yes you want the dual core. You do a lot of things on a basic PC simultaneously, even when you dont realize it. No real reason to be buying a single core computer in this day an age.

 

I bought a Acer 1410 that came with a SU3500 for my nephew. He uses it for his homework, watch movies and to play online games. It is fine for him and he is happy with his notebook. It will not do so well with HD. However, this is not an issue for everyone. For websurfing and general tasks even multitasking it is ok. The 800mhz speed BUS and 3MB of cache helps. I was on a strict budget when I was buying his notebook.
Obviously the dual core one is better but i don't agree that these core 2 solo's are not much better than an atom. I've got a laptop with a core solo first gen and the processor it has is even still noticeably better than what you will find with the majority of netbooks.

I think it is worth $45 more, it gives your notebook more of a cushion. However, if your on a tight budget and only want it for general tasks then you need to think about what is best for you.

The SU4100 also does not do so great with HD and heavy flash either.

 

+1000. I don't get why people are still purchasing single core cpu.