What kind of performance will I get with i7-2670QM, 2.2-3.1GHz,

Recently ordered a Sager 8150 with the 2nd Generation Intel® Core™ i7-2670QM, 2.2-3.1GHz. Just curious what kind of performance I will get from this CPU, im not too familar with the new i7 series.

Thanks for any info!

 

I'm curious for the answer to this question as well. I'm getting the NP8170 with the same proc and wonder how long it will last me.

 

What are you familiar with? If you give us another reference, you'll be able to get a better comparison. For example, what is your last system's CPU? Also, what type of things will you be doing on your computer (games, math calculations, video rendering, etc.)?

 

Gaming, and I like to capture HD videos using Roxio Gamecap and upload video to Youtube, and maybe some live streaming. My old laptop was a first generation Alienware M15X (before the Dell buyout). Unfortunately im not home right now to tell you the exact CPU that was in it, but I remember it was Pentium 4 Dual Core, I want to say 2.4Ghz but don't quote me on that.

 

Your GPU will play more into this, and you will be very very happy with your 6990 and your 2670qm will do anything you need it to for a long while. Congrats.

 

In terms of gaming your CPU is not better than an i5. Well atleast for the majority of the games. It is sad really. Everything is GPU. CPUs have reached a limit where they are more than good enough.

Don`t know about the streaming part though. I think a Quad core, i.e i7 will do this job better. More threads to do the streaming while gaming.

 

I had a similar question I looked at the 2670 and 2760. From what I understand the performance increase is significant but I don't know if it help gaming at all heh. I ended up going with the 2760... mainly due to this PassMark - Intel Core i7-2760QM @ 2.40GHz - Price performance comparison
Then again I'm running a 5 year old core 2 duo on my old laptop and it doesn't seem to affect my gaming at all (but the video card sure does). Do the CPU improvements over the last several years help gaming at all? Or does it just speed up loading times and whatnot?

 

So my old CPU was a Intel Core 2 Duo T9300

 

In CPU bound games like Supreme Commander and GTA IV, your i7 will be able to play at higher settings and resolution with higher frame rates. For most other games, they are GPU bound and you might not notice that much difference.

 

gotcha, well the GPU is a big jump from the Geforce 8700M to the AMD 6990M, so one that end ill see a difference

 

The gpu is indeed where you will see biggest gains in performance compared to the 8700M...
However, the CPU will 'shine' best in programs that require it... CAD based software such as 3ds Max predominantly uses the CPU for rendering images and animations, though it recently started incorporating nvidia's CUDA tech to use the GPU for those tasks as well (significantly reducing the render times in the process).

The CPU by itself should be more than adequate for some time to come, especially if we are talking about games, though the GPU will also do the same seeing how you got the 'high end' one of the current generation.

Comparing to your old T9300, your new CPU is several times more powerful, so in software that are heavy on this hardware, you will notice definite gains either way.

 

I think it is quite funny that many of the people who just gotta have the fastest and most expensive CPU never use it for any of the software that benefit from higher frequency or cores or whatever. I am one of them

In most games you don`t get any better FPS with an i7 quad than with a i5 dual core when you have the same GPU with both setups. I really don`t think a CPU running with higher frequency boot up faster or loads programs any faster either. The bottleneck is the HDD. And not even SSD users will benefit much with going quad than dual.

Then we have the "But quads can run more programs than duals without getting performance hit". Who the hell have a video running, have 10 tabs open with browsers with flash content, running office programs and playing a game at the same time? 1% of people really. Yes I know I exaggerate a bit here, but my point is that a dual core can handle some additional programs too while doing something else. Atleast what the average joe is running.

But yes, Quads are cheap anyway, and "future proof" for something most of us will never use anyway in the future ( ), but do we really *need* 4 cores?

 

Cloud, I have a fever. And the only prescription is "More Cores"!!!

 

I resemble that remark.

 

I'm the kind of person that uses 3d Studio Max on the go a lot, though for the moment I'm still using my CPU in the signature (which is old, but soon to be replaced with a Q9100).
To be honest, I would much greatly benefit from getting a newest laptop with a SB i7 Quad, but I don't have the needed cash right now and I also enjoy the prospect of pushing my 3 year old laptop that much.

Depends on the game/software really.
But, there have been instances where a quad cores increased minimum FPS in games and improved system responsiveness.

To be honest with you, that's more along the lines of software not being able to catch up entirely with the hardware, and just what/how many programs the person uses.
Furthermore, from a pure technological point of view, current consumer grade IT technology is child's play compared to what we could have had.
The 'average Joe's' needs in terms of usage seems to be increasingly growing actually, and a lot of those people who manipulate multimedia would greatly benefit from the most powerful hardware available.
The issue we are dealing with that most people find 'high end' hardware too expensive.

I'd dare say a lot of us who are not 'average Joes' do in fact need MORE than 4 cores.
And need it at affordable prices.
Not all quads are priced equally, and not all are 'cheap'.