dv9000z VS dv9000t

One uses the AMD Turion 64 X2 and the other Core 2 Duo.

Which one is better performance wise?

 

For most applications, either processor will be fine. For more demanding tasks like rendering/encoding/engineering apps/etc, the Core 2 will provide noticeable increases in power. Things like internet browsing, emailing, IMing, etc don't even use much power so you're fine there.

What are you planning on doing with the notebook?

 

YES!

Lack of sleep+ Partition work= Bad Idea.

I'd go with the Core 2 Duo

 

for my purpose, multi tasking (ex: office pro 2k7, spreadsheet, firefox, bittorrent, and other random apps.), heavy network transfers (both within home lan and on internet), occasional maybe frequent gaming, movie watching, mp3 and audio playing + ripping, cd/dvd r and rw

Basically Im looking to get the whole multi media laptop and the best on is the dv9000x laptop but I dont know which one to go for the "t" or "v" series.

Now proc. wise amd advertises that they are better than the core 2 duo but then the bench marks Ive been seeing say different.

I most always push my laptops and pcs to the limit. If its something new that I havnt tried like for example VoIP apps then I will definitly get around to it while still being able to successfully multi task on the laptop or pc.

So which do you recommend now?

 

FYI, Turion X2 = better price (but still good performance), Core 2 = better performance (a little more expensive).

If you tend to push things to the max, I'd say get the Core 2 if you have the budget. Even if you don't use all the power right away, you'll probably find a way to stress the processor eventually.

 

Well I just got my DV9000t in and I must say its absolutly amazing.... a little shiny but amazing,,

after doing a ton of research on the AMD Turion X2 vs the Intel Cor 2 Duo,, basically I found that Intel wins in the performance portion because they've been making dual core chips longer and have more experience... as far as how much money you may or may not to spend,, i'm not sure that you would notice a HUGE difference with the AMD,, I've always used AMD chips in the past few desktops I've built and love them..

hope this helps

 

Intel rushed the Pentium D out the door to beat the Athlon 64 X2 to market. AMD designed the x86_64 instruction set after Intel swore it couldn't be done. Intel has temporarily leapfrogged AMD, so long as your apps can make use of the massive L2 cache that Intel uses to compensate for their lack of an integrated memory controller and HyperTransport. Most of the time that works OK but it tends to make benchmarks look better than real-world use, SuperPI being the most glaring example.

 

yeah what he said

 

But wouldnt you say the amd proc is better because the cache on the intel is shared and not dedicated whereas amd is dedicated cache L2, etc plus the memory controller and hypertransport features..