QX9300 in new Dell XPS 1340

hi all,

just looking at the new dell xps 1340 notebook... looks really good, but would look even better with a quad core chip in it...

i understand it would run a lot hotter, but im used to the heat (running x9000 in toshiba u300 at 3ghz)...

battery life would be less, 45w against 25w with the p9500... i will partially counter this by using a ssd.

it would appear to physiclly fit, but the bios/mainboard may get upset with the chip...


what are your thoughts on this combo?

thanks,

josh

 

The primary reason to go with a quad core cpu is for CAD or Modeling software which I cant see happening on a 13" screen. Another arguement for a quadcore is media encoding, but again I can't see this happening on such a small portable system. There really is no other reason to get a lower clocked quad over a higher clocked dual for the same price. So my two cents says the combo doesn't make sense.

 

Doubt it will work. The power circuitry probably cannot handle the higher load. Also Dell is unlikely to provide the BIOs to support it.

 

Don't forget that you can always connect an external display . I use my 13.3" more than 90% of the time connected to an external monitor (both at home and at university) .

 

45W TDP CPUs are meant for 17"+ notebooks. Most 15"ers struggle to keep an extreme CPU cool at full load.
13" + Extreme CPU -- Never gonna happen.

 

I completely understand that and it is a good point. To me, this defeats the purpose of buying a highly portable machine like a 13" if you are going to have it stationary most of the time, dependant on an external display. Plus there are no powerful graphics sultions when you get to this size of notebook.

 

thanks for the comments.

i was worried that the power supply to the dell wouldnt cope... that being said my 13" toshiba u300/302 runs the x9000 44w tdp cpu with no trouble.. it just takes really l o n g to charge the battery.

it reaches 100 degrees celcius under max load.. 25 degrees ambient... however under 17 degree anbient which i run my office at, the system never gets ofer 70 degrees on full load... i did use as5 on the heatsinks and made sure of a nice connection...

it would be interesting to see if it would work, but i do agree with the lack of power in the graphics department. max of a 9500m in that system...

i just want something to be a portable hd video editor... my desktop is a mac pro 8x 2.8ghz, 16gb ram, 256gb ssd and 4tb ext raid 5... that does the job nicely... but customers sometimes want to see the effects and editing being done in front of them, thus the powerful notebook..

thanks,

josh

 

If your x9000 is hitting 100C load chances are if you run Prime95 or Orthos you'll hit 110-115C which is well over the you've-fried-your-CPU temperature.

As such, I recommend never running those programs.

 

70 is like the max for a desktop CPU under Prime/Orthos run. Notebook chips can take a bit more but 100 that is stretching it...

 

Well the notebook and desktop chips often have a similar thermal max, it's just that desktop users are used to panicking at 70 due to years of imprecise temperature readings on older CPUs. Typically the quads are listed higher.

100C is pushing CPU death on any chip.

http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLAQJ#

 

the x9000 will run at up to 105 degrees, or is that the temp that is will do just before it dies?

 

It'll hopefully throttle and turn of the system before it dies, but you will definately kill your chip slowly if it runs near 100C from time to time, that's high even for mobile chips.