*HP HDX18 Owners Lounge*

So if I'm running iTunes, Firefox, MS Word, and lets say downloading music using another program all at the same time would the Quad Core be better in that situation versus the T9600?

 

the Quads will be better for CPU-intensive applications, like de/coding, winrar, SETI@home, Climateprediction.net, Rosetta@home etc. Not so much gain in memory intensive apps.

 

Thanks PDX,

Yes in my scenario, all specs are exactly the same except the quad and dual's...

I guess I'm trying to figure out what it is that I want to be able to do.

I use photoshop a lot, surf the web a lot with a lot of firefox tabs opened, listen to music, use iTunes, etc...I guess a lot of miscellaneous type apps...

Watch movies in HD.....

I do would like to use VMware and run WinXP on it for old programs....

I guess I'm just concerned that I won't really be able to know which CPU type is best for me, and if Vista 64bit will truly multi-task and allow the other apps to use the cores....

I guess there's just really know way of knowing unless there's some kind of multi-core application that can monitor it's usage...

 

Well, yes and no. If a program isn't actively doing something, it's using memory but not many CPU cycles. I think it would be a little faster in your proposed scenario, but not much as the limitation would probably be more on the memory and/or network side.

To keep it simple, I'll say "generally, yes". More cores == better multitasking. Generally speaking, of course

 

The windows Task Manager will show you usage for each core.

If you plan to be doing so much, most of which sounds more like multitasking than hammering the CPU, might as well go with the quad core.

No matter whether you have 32-bit or 64-bit Vista, you will get the multitasking benefit of multiple cores between programs. The benefit of 64-bit, however, is that a single program is not limited to only 3 gigs of ram when you have 4 or 8 or 16 gigs. From the sound of it, that would be enough, but I would still suggest 64-bit Vista. There is no performance loss (for desktop apps) and compatibility generally isn't an issue unless you have not-very-well-supported external hardware. Vista's been around for a while, so any decent manufacturer will have 32- and 64-bit Vista drivers.

 

Careful: single-threaded applications (like WinRAR extracting an archive) only run on one core. All other things equal, a single thread on a quad-core 2.53 GHz system will run slightly longer than the same thread on a 2.8 GHz dual-core system.

As I stated before, that's assuming the cache mechanism is the same between the two, but that's a more complicated comparison.

 

They did drop it.

I am not too worried about a stability issue. HP never out right said what the problem was. They alluded to an ambiguous issues without clarification. Yes they did mention quality control, CPU issues, motherboard issues but the story was never stright.

To be frank I think the only real issue was HP offering of the QX9300 for way under market value.

I think HP contacted and either downgraded the CPU or had folks canceled as many orders as they could and figured if people haven't given in by now they wouldn't so they are taking these orders at a loss.

Remind you I'm shooting from the hip and I have nothing to validate what I have written.

BTW I got my e-mail today as well. I guess we'll find out if stability is an issue when I recieve the laptop.

 

Ahh task manager! Forgot about that one!

From the sound of things, I think quad core is right for me...

Will I really notice the difference between 2.5 and 2.8ghz? Probably not...how much faster? Maybe 1-2 seconds faster when unzipping a file...

So I think quad is the way to go....so I will keep my focus on quads..

 

Well, since HP isn't offering the quad now and the price will be much higher for it when they do, you might as well consider it a matter of budget for the time being

 

I meant to say the Quad is better running multiple CPU-intensive applications at once, or a single multi-core application like Supreme Commander.

fyi, winrar includes multithreaded support since version 3.60

 

Ah I see.

Didn't know that about WinRAR... guess I should RTFM when I get the new versions hehe :O

 

QuadCore is overkill for everything but the most intensive tasks. Video editing, transcoding. Heavy image processing (and by heavy I mean 500mb to 3gig image files undergoing heavy processing, not your average 3-20mb sized image file. It's futureproofing. Nvidia's CUDA and ATI's Stream technology as it becomes more widely used will further reduce the CPU load for these tasks and speed them up using the GPU's ability for parallel processing allows for certain types of data to be processed at up to 100x faster than what any CPU could do because CPU's architecture is based on processing sequential sets of instructions. Unfortunately with tasks such as rendering, video processing, and image processing, you could have a 20 core processor and it would still take quite a while for some of these tasks. Hence the reason for render farms. This is the kind of work I do quite a bit of, so having a quadcore processor in a notebook is a huge plus. Especially when a desktop isn't really a feasible alternative for me. It's actually more space efficient to have 2 notebooks running side by side rendering HD video than it is 1 desktop loaded to the hilt with raid 0 raptor's 16 gigs of ram, etc, etc, etc. For me.


The largest bottleneck for everyone is the HDD. It's the oldest technology in the modern computer, having not really been updated for going on 30 years. Cheap, large and reliable SSD drives can't come fast enough, and unfortunately they aren't really a viable alternative at this point due to space constraints. :/

The second largest bottleneck is the GPU and this affects mostly gamers.

The Core2Duo's are really overkill for most people's needs. As usual, RAM is the most important aspect for most users needs, allowing them to have more tasks running at once. Having dual hard drives + an Esata port is probably the second most important item on the list. With 3 hard drives you can be ripping CD's onto one drive, listening to music or watching HD video off of another drive, and downloading on the third drive, with no noticeable slowdowns.

So it's really a matter of each individual's needs. I can get by with a Core2duo processor (and I do, currently) but having the quadcore for image processing makes me a lot more productive. And using a program such as Sony Vegas for rendering video allows me to link the Core2Duo notebook and the quadcore notebook together for rendering video, which can make me quite a bit more productive.

Another issue is that a lot of software still doesn't offer efficient multi-thread support for using all of the cores, we're just getting to a point where most of our stuff can really take advantage of multi-core processors. And the Cuda/Stream Technology is in it's infancy, I think Photoshop CS4 is the first large scale commercial program that will take advantage of the GPU's Parallel processing capabilities. And of course other people have mentioned that Seti@home and Folding@home can also take advantage of this technology now as well.

 

Hey guys...just lettin ya know that HP's site says my quad core has shipped!

 

Yep! Just woke up to my emails that my two Quad Core units shipped also!

Happy Day!

 

Wow, great explanation....

I thought that when most people were talking about 2 harddrives, it was for the purpose of some kind of RAID or to put another OS on it..

I didn't realize that having 2-3 harddrives would increase performance if the "things" that you were doing were all on each drive.....I should give that a shot....watch an HD movie off one drive while zipping a big file on another...


Aren't there still issues with SSD drives? I heard something like it can only handle so many read/writes before it goes dead? Aren't reads fast but writes slow on SSD? I'm still trying to catch up on all this new tech...

For me, I just want everything to be snappy. I just want to be able to extract my 1GIG RAR file in seconds instead of waiting 2-3 minutes....

 

Wow, you bought 2??? Good luck with them!

 

Did anyone ask if and when the quad core would be back up there as an option?

 

Exactly, that is part of my concern....do I pay the extra price for it (which I don't mind) but will I know if I am actually taking advantage of it...

I'm not one to really benchmark the things I buy, I just assume they work and hope I am getting bang for my buck...

For example, I watch HD movies, right now my Dual Core 1.6ghz can barely play them in 720p format. If I skip to another scene, sometimes it takes forever to render the image and start displaying the movie again, so the audio actually starts playing before I see anything....it's a pain..

I want to be able to skip around to any scene and just have it play immediately.

The problem is, I won't know if that is the quad core making it happen fast or the faster C2D....you know what I mean?

It would be nice to watch HD movies while extracting big RAR/ZIP files, downloading files, running virus scan in the background and surfing the net with multiple tabs with photoshop open in the background and dreamweaver...

That's pretty much how I use my PC....

 

From what I've been reading, it was suppose to be yesterday but all they did was add the 4gig RAM option....so maybe next month?

I'm hoping when they do, prices will drop because of the holidays and the economy....

 

The read write issue I think is overblown. Yes, its there but I think you will end up replacing your SSD with a newer tech or larger drive before this becomes an issue for you.

Right now the real issue with SSDs are the controllers.

There was a earlier post on this issue. Read the Anard Tech link to their portal to understand the current SSD issues.

 

Awesome breakdown.

 

I've noticed, at least for the HDX 16/18, that HP tends to update the configuration options on thursdays and saturdays

 

I know when I was talking with CS they told me that there were 133 orders for the QX9300...

 

never received the "email" but mine is now going to be here today, and seeing how the "estimate build/ship date" was 10/30, I am hoping they shipped my quad.

 

This could be just a matter of audio/video codecs that you are using to play movies. Some codecs are better, faster and more efficient at processing data. You can get and try different codecs from free-codecs.com

 

While most of what you said is accurate, the context switching overhead for multiple applications on a multicore processor is going to be lower when the number of cores is higher. I've worked in high-performance computing on multi-processor and multicore systems for many years and I can tell you for sure there is a direct benefit to everyday activities, so neither is overkill.

Although, you are correct, the memory and HDDs are very much bottlenecks.

 

Thanks, reading now!

 

ahhh ok! I will check it out...

Just to let you know, I am using VLAN to play MKV files...

 

WOW! Delivery TODAY??? Please let us know if you got the QUAD's or not!!!

I was hoping to be first, but now if you get yours, it's up to you to post the first BIG review of a QUAD (assuming you got shipped a Quad)...

 

Mine just shipped 4 hours ago, should have a beautiful quad-core HDX in my hands by Tuesday

 

For MKV files, I've found out that the Matroska codec pack works great for me. It has fast file seeking feature in it

 

Since I didn't get email stating it was the Quad, I have little hope... but guess wait and see..
if it is not, Ryan will have some explaining to do.

 

Well, if it doesn't say quad on the order status I bet all you're going to hear is "we're sorry, that system isn't available." I learned last week that with some convincing they will actually help you out on the phone - it's just annoying.

I wish I was actually *receiving* mine today... it would be an awesome birthday present Instead, I see they failed to upgrade my shipping to two days. /facepalm

 

If I install this codec, do I have to do anything special with VLAN?

Or will VLAN automatically pickup the codec somehow?

 

How can you tell what method of shipment? My Fedex tracking just shows "IP Direct Distribution". I don't think you can go by the order detail...that probably hasn't changed since you placed the order.

 

I've never used VLAN so I can't comment much on it. Typically one would want to uninstall a previous codec prior to installing a new one. I just use windows media player and it will pick up the matroska codecs pack.

 

Hmm, I never installed any codecs before so VLAN is either using whatever my system already has or provides its own.

Are you saying that Media Player can play MKV files? I didn't know that!

 

Yes, but you first need to install the codec. Give it a try

 

It's what the shipping email says, so I guess it could be wrong, but I was sure that would be updated.

All FedEx says is that my package was received after cutoff.

 

Is this it? It says last Updated May 1 2006?


http://www.free-codecs.com/download/Matroska_Pack.htm

 

When I checked for updating...it sent me to install this:

http://www.cccp-project.net/download.php?type=cccp

 

Ok, I installed the CCCP pack and it does seem to work better than VLAN.

It also came with Windows Media Classic.

Do you know what the difference between the regular Media Player that I have now versus the classic?

I figured the classic is less bloated, but anything else? Both seemed to play MKV files quite well. I know that media player was never able to play MKV before I installed the CCCP pack...

I still need a new PC though because it is still kinda slow but better than VLAN...

Thanks for the suggestion!!

I'm sure now that when I get my new PC, if I install this CCCP pack, it will be even that much faster!!!

 

Hopefully this isn't "Test Site A".

 

I took an afternoon nap and had a dream they sent the Q9100 processor in lieu of the QX9300.

I was hopping mad. That is until Jessica Biel stepped in with a little something to make up for it. The rest is censored folks.

 

Somehow, this doesn't seem like a good deal. $1949.99

Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium with Service Pack 1 (64-bit)

Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo Processor T9600 (2.80GHz)

4GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm)

250GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive with HP ProtectSmart Hard Drive Protection

Intel Next-Gen Wireless-N Mini-card

All other options are included in the HP BTO....


If I am going to pay $2,000. I'd want to at least have a quadcore in there...

 

Get the minimal memory from HP then buy the memory from newegg or tigerdirect. If you get the 3Gig for $0 then you can pop out the 1Gig stick and replace it with a $2Gig RAM stick for in and around $40. Save yourself $110.

If you look at other venders offering the QX9300 option they are charging in and around $770-$1000 for the quad upgrade from thier base processor option.


Dell M6400 Covet

Lenovo W700


Shooting from the hip here but I have a feeling if the QX9300 option comes back its going to be for a premium.

I would stick it out to see what the pricing is going to be. If the pricing option is nuts your better off looking for a QX9300 with a DDR3 option.

If things fell through with the HDX I was going to get a OCZ Extreme 840 Barebones System.

OCZ supports up to 4GB DDR3, QX9300, ATI SLI, blu-ray drive, dual drives. The only drawback is no 1080p screen.

I was going to link it off the XOTIC PC portal but seems they are out.

 

Of course there will always be a difference between 2 cores and 4 cores, but the difference for most tasks is going to be minimal. We're talking a matter of of a second or two in most cases unless we're doing processor intensive tasks in which case you can save minutes or even tens of minutes, and if you're doing that kind of thing daily then we're talking about hours of productivity saved every week.


As for SSD, As someone else mentioned I think the problems with it are overblown, however I think the price issues are not. It's best to let the early adopters drive the prices down and to also let them be used as beta testers to make the technology more reliable before buying into it unless you absolutely have to have the speed it offers right now. For me personally, SSD just doesn't offer enough storage space right now vs. cost ratio. So I stick with good old, slow and reliable HDDs for the time being (sigh). Don't get me wrong, if the size of the drives were where I need them, I would seriously consider purchasing SSD, but they're not, so I wait.

As for using different hard drives for different tasks. Absolutely. I have 1 hard drive set up for my video/music/surfing/caching, and another hard drive set up as my scratch disk/encoding/transcoding/rendering/ripping drive and it works beautifully like this. Unfortunately my current notebook doesn't have an Esata port or I could do even more with it. One of the reasons I'm so interested in the HDX18.

 

Wow, that is quite a premium, I didn't think it would cost that much...

For some reason, I'm just not a fan of Dell's and Lenovo's...I'm sure they are just as good though....I like HP's styling...and I like the design of their keyboard...

The RAM sounds like a good idea so I will do that...

I guess I am just eager to get the HDX18 since I am seeing that guys here are starting to get them delivered...

I also would like to get into the video editing world...so it would make sense to get the quad....I really hope prices come down significantly before the holiday season...

 

Are your HDD's 5400rpm or 7200rpm? I am assuming 7200...?

Sounds like some of you guys here really do push the machines and do the most you can with them. Glad to hear that, I think most consumers don't even come close to pushing their PC's....


I think I find myself in between the average consumer and the hardcore power users.....

 

My favorite parts about the Dell is (kind of) the DDR3 (faster, but higher latency), and *especially* the LED backlit screen.

Even better would be the Sony Vaio AW with a quad-core and their LED screen that can display the entire Adobe RGB colorspace. That's a win for me because I'm a photographer among many many other things that require a great laptop