a T7500 with 4MB cache or a T4400 with 1MB cache?

According to cpubenchmark.net the T4400 is about 17% faster than the T7500 both run at a max speed of 2.2GHz).

Which one is better for a computer programmer? I mean which one will be faster at compiling programs in C++?

Same question for rendering, and video encoding?

 

Audio/Video Benchmarks : Does Cache Size Really Boost Performance?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2045/4
Unfortunately they don't have results for compiling.

Hard to say if cache will balance out that 17% difference.

 

It's even harder to tell considering that the two CPUs are not from the same generation.

 

Unless the T7500 is free, you can get a T8300 (2.4, 3 MB cache, Penryn) for ~40-50 on Ebay, slightly more than a T7500 and boy is it a big difference over T7500 and a T4400.

 

I own the T7500. So in a sence it's free. Is it better than the T4400 though?

 

Yes, if you already own the parts, the Intel T4400 is a newer part (2009 vs 2006), manufactured on newer technology (45nm vs 65nm). It is essentially a newer, updated "Celeron" version of the Intel Core 2 Duo processor.

In reality, you won't notice a difference either way. The two CPUs are so similar in areas where it matters, that any difference in benchmarks will be negligible.

To be quite honest, I would just use whatever CPU you currently have in your computer. It isn't worth the 30 minutes it would take to open up your laptop and swap processors.

 

Sorry to correct you but the T4400 is a Pentium dual core. It's actually a Core 2 Duo with half the cache disabled .

Swapping the CPU in this laptop takes about 2 minutes watch at hand. So swapping the CPU is not a problem. I actually did it 4 or 5 times yesterday when I tested to see if I can get a T9900 to work in this laptop

 

According to Notebookcheck, the T7500 is ranked higher than the T4400

The performance is probably very similar though, since they're ranked closely. I don't think it's worth swapping out for a T4400.

 

The Intel T4400 is not a Pentium-generation product. It is a Core 2 Duo-generation technology, that just happens to use Pentium branding / naming.

The Intel Core 2 Duo T7500 is a Merom-generation CPU. Merom-generation CPUs are based on 65nm manufacturing process, and fueled the first wave of Intel Core 2 Duo mobile CPU parts (among other market segments).

The Intel Pentium T4400 is a Penryn-generation CPU. Penryn-generation CPUs are based on the 45nm manufacturing process, succeeded the Merom-generation parts, and fueled the next wave of Intel Core 2 Duo mobile CPU parts.

The Intel "Pentium" T4400 uses the same CPU core and manufacturing process as Core 2 Duo processors. It simply has less cache, so it was branded / named as a lower-end "Pentium" processor rather than the mainstream "Core 2 Duo" name.

In either case, the Intel Pentium T4400 is a newer processor, using a newer manufacturing process, but the same Core 2 Duo architecture. Theoretically, it should be slightly "better". But you're not going to notice any real-world benefit.

*Shrug*
Ok, well, if you want to swap it out, then swap it out. My point was that I don't think it would be worth the trouble (even if it is 2 minutes worth of trouble) because you're not going to see any real-world performance difference.

 

So get a Penryn Core 2 Duo, problem solved.

 

sell both and get the t9500

 

Selling both won't rise me enough money to buy a t9500

 

get something from the t9000 line up

 

I know that the T4400, and the T7500 are both Core 2 Duo. Also the T4400 is no as you think made with 1MB, or at least it is not the case of the one I have. The die size suggests that the T4400 I have is actually a T6600 with half the core disabled. It is likely that the disable part of the cache is faulty.

Also I know that the Pentium and Celeron are just marketing brands as they do all share the same Core 2 Duo Architecture.

I agree that the T4400 is better due to is 45mm manufacturing technology. Also because of this it is cooler than the T7500. The downside is that it doesn't support virtualization technology but this is another story

The point of this thread is for me to know when the T7500 is better than the T4400? What are the applications that would benefit from the extra cache for the T7500?

As for every day use I know that they are the same... this is coming from some one who has been using a laptop with a Celeron 585 Single Core for the last week or so and he is okay with it

 

The only T9000 that will work on this laptop are the T9300 and the T9500. I've already tested the T9900 and it doesn't work because the chipset on the laptop is the GL40, and the GL40 support only CPUs with a 667 and 800MHz FSB.
minimum price of £85 for the T9300 and the £130 for the T9500. That's too much.

 

Suggest the lowest end 45nm premium Penryn, ie: T8100/T8300. Obvious advantage over the T7500 is the 45nm tech. Th advantage they have over the 45nm budget T4xxx/T6xxx cpus is the SuperLFM, IDA and VT modes. The first allowing substantial undervolting, the second giving an extra multiplier for an extra 200Mhz free when running Throttlestop's dual-IDA + Dell systems or with a modded bios. Not to mention the 45nm with *less cache* is the one to get if looking to do any sort of PLL pinmod. A T8300 can definitely run in the 3.0-3.5Ghz range and would be the pick for bang-per-buck. See sig for more details.