Should i upgrade from 920xm to 3920xm for 660$?

Hi guys. One of my countrymen has offered me to upgrade from my machine to a Clevo P150EM similarly specced (16GB vs 12GB, 7970m vs 7970m, AUO 95% gamut vs AUO 95% gamut) only with ivy bridge XM as opposed to my old nehalem CPU.
He's asking for 660$ to trade up.
What do you guys think?

My machine is in the sig, along with some bench scores. My machine has no warranty coverage, the webcam doesn't work and the chassis has a palm-print and a few scuffs/scratches (not very visible).
His is mint and under warranty with Eurocom, and i was hoping maybe the GPU could overclock some (mine can't really).

I'm thinking this might give me maybe 20% extra framerate on average and maybe more in some games (i play SC2 and Tera Online quite a bit).
The thing is, I've seen some bombin' crossfire machines that manage to pull out less combined score than I do, and I'm uncertain about how much of an improvement I'll get to see during actual gameplay.

 

I think that would be $660 well spent.

See:
PassMark - Intel Core i7 920XM @ 2.00GHz - Price performance comparison

See:
PassMark - Intel Core i7-3920XM @ 2.90GHz - Price performance comparison


(And yes, your 7970m is cpu limited...).

While you may not see 20% improvement in the highest FPS 'scores' - you'll definitely see a difference in the MIN FPS 'scores' that are more 'real world' useable imo.



Throw in an SSD or two and you'll be set for the next few years too (performance-wise) for about $1K.

Good luck.

 

The one thing I would be wary of is that those Clevo notebooks use AMD Enduro switchable graphics, which can cause a world of hurt for gaming. GPU under-utilization and other significant bugs continue to plague notebooks so equipped. Unlike Alienwares, I don't believe there's an option in the BIOS to disable it. I would see if there is any way you could "test drive" the machine first by installing some games and checking out the performance.

 

Thank you both for your advice.
@tilleroftheearth: Thanks for that link. It does paint a pretty impressive picture, however I'm currently running the 920xm OC'd at 3.2GHz across all cores (I know, the 3920xm can OC much further too) and games are not as performance sensitive as PCMark is. That being said, yes, I'm definitely CPU bottle-necked in quite a few of my favorite games.
@saturnotaku: thanks for the advice. Having used the 7970m as main GPU for so long, I'd forgotten the enduro issues others may suffer from. I'll have to research this some more.

 

CCC 13.4 may have resolved much of the bugs. I don't use Enduro, so I'm can't be fully sure.

 

one other side benefit would be an increased battery life. the 8690 had barely 45minutes on it.
it could be worth the 660usd if you do a lot of cpu intensive tasks, if the 920xm is bottlenecking your gpu (i doubt this though, the 920 is still a beast), more battery and a warranty is important to you; and the aesthetic looks of the newer laptop (slimmer, illum kb) are important to you.

 

I don't believe a 920xm at 3,2 ghz on all cores is bottlenecking your gpu.

 

Not only does the 920XM @ 3.2GHz bottleneck the GPU in this system - so will the 3920XM bottleneck any other highend GPU too.

Not only the GPU, btw - all components are bottlenecked - including the storage subsystem (HDD or SSD), USB ports and memory subsystem.

Especially if we compare to desktop platforms (which we should to see any limitations of our mobile offerings).


For a particular GPU/game combination the bottleneck may be just a few FPS - but there is no doubt a ~3.5 year old tech based platform will be poorly matched to anything even remotely 'current' like a 3920XM based system. And while maximum fps may not go up (too much) - the minimum fps should enjoy a real and usable increase which will translate to a more fluid experience in all games which push the system as far as possible.

Considering the $660 'upgrade' price when the cpu alone is ~$1.1K and the same GPU - I would take the chance to 'prove' that the 920xm is or isn't bottlenecking my game play. Even if I didn't believe that it was bottlenecking every other component in my current setup.

 

1-3 years from now, it will. Already some recent games such as Crysis 3 will have limited FPS. It's also usually easier to cope with a GPU bottleneck (turn down eyecandy settings) than a CPU bottleneck (disable anti-virus, cripple the OS, etc).

 

When it was new it was bottlenecking the gpu...

 

The 920xm OCed to over 3ghz does NOT bottleneck the 7970M lol

I can play as I am sure the OP can too any game at maximum settings perfectly fluidly. (FC3, Cry 3 etc)

Now in a SLI or Xfire system then yes the 920xm will bottleneck considerably 2 highend mobile GPU's. In a single gpu machine the 920xm OCed is still fine matched with any GPU. In fact OCed it is comparable to a 2820qm and perhaps even a stock clocked 2920xm.

 

Lol if a 920xm bottlenecks the 7970 then every other mobile cpu aside from the xm sb and ib bottlenecks it.
I think what the op was experiencing was more a driver or a power issue.

Sent from a Galaxy far, far away

 

Exactly that is the issue here. If not properly cooled the 920xm (a hot beast) won't perform well and will have adverse effects on the GPU and therefore performance of the system.

In a sandy bridge or ivy bridge machine the chips run cooler and therefore more stable out of the box. The 920xm needs some work to get stability when you OC it.

OP disregard tiller's comments as he even believes the 3920xm bottlenecks the 7970M. This is laughable! Unless you lower resolution to 800x600 and turn graphics settings down these highend CPUs cannot bottleneck 99% of games out there. Perhaps a massive RTS strategy game with 1000s of units in play could also bring the cpu to its knees but most don't play such games while so long as they are multithreaded modern CPUs shouldn't have much a problem even here.

 

Op if you overclocked your cpu and gpu, the stuttering you are getting might be due to thermal issues as king said or your components could be drawing more power than your psu can supply.

Sent from a Galaxy far, far away

 

If I had the money and was offered a similar shaped rig Id take it.

 

Go ahead and ignore the info I'm offering - but even the OP has stated that he is currently CPU bottlenecked.

Mobile systems does not equal desktop system performance (it never has).

And even the highest configured desktop system can make certain games CPU bottlenecked.


The thing to keep in mind is: a cpu/platform/chipset that is over 3 years newer will always be faster and more fluid than yesteryear's 'monster' setups - even if those setups are O/C'd to 3.2GHz or more.

Synthetic 'scores' are not what we're chasing - we're talking actual real world results (in this case: game play).


An inadequate power supply or overheating issues is actually WHY I would go for the newer platform (and what may be limiting the real world performance) - those are the kind of advances that OC'ing can never negate - actually the opposite: they would bring those issues front and center (and without any of the IPC benefits that make 2x performance gains (at the same clock speed) possible).


...

 

I am not talking about synthetic scores either. I clearly said for gaming the 920xm OCed is more than adequate.

What you say is true tiller however you have it the wrong way round. In synthetic tests the newer platform/chipsets etc will score always higher. In real world gaming not so much the case.

What the 920xm does demand is good cooling. Most do not pay enough attention to keep the chip properly cooled and the laptop's cooling in tip top condition to allow the chip to perform consistently month after month. As a result newer systems with cooling chips seem to perform consistently better for most.

Upgrading to the newest and greatest will always be better sure but is it always worth it? No. Is it good for the environment. Absolutely not.

 

Good for the environment? That's an argument? lol...

 

The OP mentioned he plays SC2... That's one of the most CPU-dependent games except for Cities XL and Planetside 2, especially when you move into late-game, or godforbid, those 4v4 matches.

You do have to consider the fact that he gets a mint new laptop for $600. His current laptop is in disrepair, and doesn't have a warranty:

To the OP, I'd suggest test-running the new laptop with your games and see how it performs.

 

Yup the longer my 920xm runs the cleaner it gets no matter how efficient the newer gen is it still has to be manufactured first.

After reading the above post and after re-reading the first post I agree with Loney. His laptop does seem to be on the way out. Perhaps best to part out/trade up. I answered the thread almost solely on its title originally

 

I wish to thank you all for the input. While King of Interns is right that for most apps the 920xm doesn't represent a bottleneck, there's the unfortunate fact that for what I am playing, even turning everything down to 800x600 and low graphical settings doesn't get my framerates above ~80. I wouldn't mind that, but SC2 and Crysis 3 will really chug along in unit-heavy scenes (we're talking 20-40fps). I admit that I do max out everything graphically - including Crysis 3 running at Very High with FXAA activated - but the 7970m seems to be holding its ground very well.
Giving the CPU 200-300Mhz more can be immediately felt in a rise of about 5-10 minimum fps, but it really pushes the heat up.
While my machine cools incredibly well (we're talking 90-92 degrees celsius under full load at 3.06Ghz across all cores), I would not want to push it any higher since 24-25x multis can really hit close to the 99 degrees limit, and that's where the PSU and the cpu itself would really be starting to feel the heat and power consumption.

Again, thank you all for your input.

 

The 920xm is running at 100% load at 3ghz+ in crysis 3? How do you do that? Multiplayer?

I didn't notice this in single player.

You are right about the heat though. I have completed a mod recently to allow running 24x across all cores at 100% load but it still needs some work for full stability lol