P9600 versus T9550 for overclocking

I'm going to get either of these, since the price difference is minimal (29$ for the P9600, which draws 25W, compared to the T9550's 35W). The only question is: Which overclocks better?

It seems likely that the P9600 should overclock better since it generates less heat, but on the other hand it might be limited since it draws less power.

Anyone has any hard data on this?

Thanks.

 

Which notebook do you have? Are you sure you can OC your CPU? It's hard to say since in the past both situations have occurred. I would still get the P9600 though.

 

The MSI with Turbo options. Seems very overclockable.

Why would you get the P9600?

I work with a CPU-bound simulation program, so this is crucial to me.

 

I wouldn't recommend OCing for several reasons:

- laptops do not handle heat very well even with stock configurations
- Both CPUs you mentioned are high end, and increasing their clock speeds will not give you a noticeable increase in performance. It would be like adding a nitro system to a Ferrari Enzo; in other words, it is pointless.

 

i think the t9550 would overclock since it gets more power, but it would also run hotter.

 

I'd think T series ought to OC better, I don't know why, but I suspect lower voltage on the P chip isn't going to help with heavier overclocking.

Then again truth be told, the maximum the bios allow is about 20%, so standard voltage ought to be fine. With T9550, you can manually undervolt in windows, into a pretty much a P9600.

Given its pretty much identical hardware, I would not pay $30 for something that I can mod myself.

 

The stock voltages are the same for the two CPUs, the P series should be higher binned hence more energy efficient, so I would think it would OC better than the T series.

 

Great, so every one has one of the theories I mentioned at the start. I need to find some hard data...

"- Both CPUs you mentioned are high end, and increasing their clock speeds will not give you a noticeable increase in performance. It would be like adding a nitro system to a Ferrari Enzo; in other words, it is pointless."

What the hell? Do you know how computers work?

 

What are you using your computer for? OCing won't make much difference in most day-to-day tasks. If you are running your CPU at 100% often, then you will benefit from OCing (ie. running mathematical calculations or rendering).

 

.....................

 

That's a bit of a foolish question; obviously you know the answer. Why else would you post here other than to ask for advice?

 

I asked a very specific question and got a weird, condescending car analogy as a response.

Why post if you don't have anything constructive to add?

 

your ocing limit will be RAM, not CPU

 

Not that I care if you found my analogy condescending, but I offered my advice because your question revealed that you probably don't know much about computers. With this in mind, I often frame explanations using analogies which most people appreciate.

Secondly, my post was meant to be constructive; although why you're being defensive is beyond me. I offered some advice, but you can do what you like with it.

 

Interesting. Which part of my question revealed that?

Anyway, the original question is still up.

 

Is a Q9000 an option?

 

Unfortunately not - the software only uses two threads.

 

Sorry missed that. Either way, I stand by my choice of the P9600 as explained above.

 

If I could but intrude upon this conversation of overclocking.

Heat, I think, would be manageable or MSI wouldn't allow it. You, hopefully, aren't going to be using it on your lap, anyhow, right?

Bog's answer is satisfactory. Some programs will so to speak "cap out" even when you increase the CPU frequency to 7GHz. Usually, it is games when other system components bottleneck the CPU.

But, in your case, if your application is truly CPU-intensive (100% or close), then the added GHz will only help. What particular application is it, if I may ask?

Here is a link to Core 2 Duo scaling on games.

World in Conflict is usually pretty CPU-intensive. You can see that after a point, GHz don't matter, as the 2.6GHz processor scores almost exactly the same as a 3.0GHz processor. But, BUT, these are games and thus they have been bottlenecked by the GPU.

To continue the analogy, it's like having a 50-lane high way when only three or four cars move at a time. Pointless.

However, if you're application is truly GHz-hungry/CPU-intensive, it will help.

Here is another article concerning CPU scaling, but this one includes some other programs. You get the whole span, from 2.4GHz to 3.46GHz. It helps some places, some places it doesn't. Really depends on your program!

~Ibrahim~

 

Man, this is the same conversation I had like 3 years ago when I pin modded my Sonoma based system, and I ended up in a huge flamewar with a bunch of people who thought they knew hardware.

Get on with it guys, Overclocking is a lot more possible now with the improved technology and better cooling systems. I've had no issues on either of my previous or current systems.

OP: I'd say the T9550 would be the better overclocker simply because if draws more voltage. When overclocking, often voltage is the limiting factor for acheiving significant clock speed increase and stability. From my experience higher model processors (T series) are often a more superior core, now the P9600 is an exception, but since your overclocking the voltage comes as more important since at higher clockspeeds you may need that full 35W power that the core requires, but since the VIDs are locked down to certain degree(you won't be able to voltmod under normal means) that may be your limiting factor.

 

I do a lot of overclocking with desktop CPU's so I might be able to offer some insight.

Both cpus are stock speed of 2.66 ghz
both are E0 stepping
both are 45nm
both have a fsb speed of 1066mhz

These factors are the main things which determine better overclocking. Since the two cpus are also identical except for the voltage rating of 35w vs. 25w, I doubt you would notice a difference in overclocking.

I would personally go for the lower voltage cpu, usually because v-core voltage is increased over stock anyways. I would flip a coin, I honestly think both will hit a wall around the same speed. Since you are apparently using a program to overclock, I doubt the software will notice an overclocking wall. If you were manually overclocking adjusting voltages and speeds yourself I would be more concerned.

 

Well you can't increase v-core on notebooks normally, so that's why I came to conclusion of utilizing the T9550. Determining overclockability odds are lile flippinf a coin...

 

hmm, i didn't know v-core voltages couldn't be adjusted. But since it's program overclocking I still say it won't matter. . . .

Thanks D3X.

 

) excuse me, but the answers were so weird! (sorry for late!)
unfortunately i'm not such a help too, but what i can say is i saw a p8400 that has been OCed 130 MHz and power consumption increased to 35w! i predict that T series must be the same, i mean i think it goes to 45w!

I have 1 question and 1offer :

what model of MSI you have? G series? what size? what model? what GPU?! if you have a high wattage GPU it's a great risk to use T series and OC it! it will burn your lapy! i saw a MSI with quad cpu (45w) and the temperature at load was 90-100 C !

offer: see sandra if u can; it might help u. it has several cpu tested. according to what i saw, there was no significant performance difference between CPU with same tech and clock!

by the way MSI turbo mode is not such a help, at best condition you'll get only %5 OCing, and it means just one step better (2.66 to 2.8). decision is up to you.
i will appreciate any question if i answer. good luck

 

appreciate any question if i could answer sorry for poor english

 

ripping.org has highest overclocks for P9700=3.6Ghz (don't see P9600), and T9550=3.7Ghz

Logic would suggest P9600 likely can be overclocked higher if apply vmods since it's can run 2.53Ghz/6M cache at 25W TDP.

 

3.7 GHz at what platform?! I think alienware is not capable of doing so, MSI is sorry!

 

Thats odd, im sitting with q9000 at 100% at 65c, this is a gt725 rebrand, and the overclock is 20% , go for the p series processor, less tdp, best way to overclock.

in the msi the p9500 hits 3 ghz with turbo button (plus its warrenty supportive), boost that with some fsb pushing, and loosen your memory timings, you have yourself a very good overclock.

 

very good, that MSI i said was gt628 with q9000 and only %5 OC, so your 17" model maybe has two cooling system (as gateway and alienware) so that the temperature does not go higher than 65 C. very good for you.

but my advise is not to change the cpu, dual core CPU's have smaller contact with heatsink, and i think for touching same performance you'll get the same temperature! or at least you'll loose the benefit of multicore processing. i choose the q9000 with %20 OC at 65 C instead of dual core processor at every temperature! dual cores have no future. specially that my p8400 at 30w (bad OC) runs 40 C at idle, and i think there is few laptops that have good cooling device as gateway FX !

 

by the way, i think laptops with quad core cpu do not support the dual cores! vice versa. i tried to upgrade my cpu to q9000 or q9100 but it doesn't work, and i think there is difference between motherboard design and components! as in gateway FX families there is 3 model that supports dual core, and 2 models with quad core CPU's, and there is not possibility of change the cpu to the other family!
and i'm curious that what software u used that takes the cpu at %100 load?! was it just a test utility?

 

look at this ( http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-MSI-GT725-Gaming-Notebook.18323.0.html)
i saw what u said, it's body temperature is about 55 C, be sure that cpu is not below 65-70 C , maybe even 80 C as you see in gt628 !

 

I don't know how your laptop supported quad core! maybe because of that rebranding you said. maybe it can downgrade to dual core and dual core supporting does not support quad! although i still advise you not to downgrade your CPU