T8100 versus T9300

Hey guys,
I was buying a new laptop, and was considering which of the two CPU's should I place in it? I'd place the T9300 if the heat generated/power consumed is not too much higher than that of the T8100. Are there any specs on heat generated/power consumed during load time on these two CPU's? IMO, both would be enough to play the games I want, such as GTA4 and sports games, but I'd like my laptop (considering ASUS FS8n) to be relatively quiet (reduce the fan noise by reducing the heat). Please let me know..
Thanks,

 

Hey Swami, I have a T9300 in an HP dv6500se and aftering using RMClock to undervolt, I brought it from 70C max, down to low 50s. When web surfing, it goes down to 30C and below. And before undervolting, I only achieved 70C after running ORTHOS for an extended period of time.

 

The T8100 is a 45nm chip, running at 2.1Ghz with 3mb of L2 cache and a 800Mhz FSB.
The T9300 is a 45nm chip, running at 2.5Ghz with 6mb of L2 cache and a 800Mhz FSB.

According to Intel, the T8100 has a 35 watt TDP, and can run up to 100C.
The T9300 s also rated at a 35watt TDP and can run up to 100C.

The only difference between the chips, is 3mb of cache and a 400Mhz speed difference.
If you have the money, or need a very powerful processor, you should get the T9300.

Both cpu's can be undervolted with programs like CPU Rightmark and Notebook Hardware Control. These programs will restrict the voltage to your processor, so that it uses less power and runs cooler.
Undervolting does not decrease processor performance.

I would not expect much of a temperature difference between the processors. I say this cause both processors have the same thermal power consumption. They have a 45nm process, so both will run very cool, so neither of them will need extended fan run time to keep the processor running cool.

I hope this helps,

K-TRON

 

I have the T9300 in my DV9700T and the T8100 in my Vostro 1700. I can't tell a difference in any respect between the two to be honest.

 

The extra clock speeds on the T9300 will only take effect when used in cpu intensive programs. Other than that most things will run the same

 

hmm so for a guy whos doing mostly programming/work - occasionally movies and games, wouldn't the T8100 suffice? I'd rather save the ~$300 and spend it on a high end audio card and hard drive (the default hard drive for the laptop am looking at is supposed to be noisy)

 

Another question I had was regarding the different cache sizes. I understand how higher clocking speed = better performance on computationally intensive programs, but what about larger L2 cache? How does that change things in this comparison

 

The T8100 is enough to nearly handle everything up to date. This would probably your best choice unless you plan to use hardcore cpu programs

Actually a dual core 1.8-2ghz is sufficient enough to handle the latest games and programs

Dont worry about L2 cache, it doesnt change a significant amount of performance. Save your $300 and spend it on something else

 

With my T9300, I am currently in powersaver mode with battery. The CPU is clocked at 1.25 Ghz and loading times of office and web programs feel just as fast as if it was clocked at full speed. The notebook has been on for about 20 minutes. Right now, RMClock is reporting a CPU Core temp of 21.4C. CPUID Hardware Monitor reports 26C (78F) on both cores. I would be interested to know if a T9300 might run cooler than a T8100 clocked at the same speed.

 

All things being equal, a Penryn and Penryn 3M (T9300 and T8100 cores, respectively) should run at about the same temperature. Because of the smaller cache, the T8100 may actually run a bit cooler because there's less "stuff" to keep powered on. This is similar to how E2xx0s tend to run cooler than similarly clocked E4xx0 and E6xx0 processors.