The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    Processor Question: SU9400 is faster than T7200, right?

    Discussion in 'Lenovo' started by Matt, Mar 21, 2009.

  1. Matt

    Matt Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    2,618
    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    I currently have a T60 with a T7200 (2.0 GHz, 4MB L2 Cache) and I'm wonder how the X301's SU9400 (1.4GHz, 3MB L2 Cache) is going to compare to it (speed-wise). Is there any way to compare them other than just using the X301 and getting a feel for it?

    (Also, I haven't yet looked at any benchmarks... should I?)

    Matt
     
    Matt, Mar 21, 2009
    #1
  2. sesshomaru

    sesshomaru Suspended Disbelief!

    Reputations:
    316
    Messages:
    1,918
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    56
    It certainly wouldn't be as fast as the T7200.. Sheer clock speed makes it impossible.. However, it would benefit from the higher FSB.. I guess wPrime would give you a fair idea..
     
    sesshomaru, Mar 21, 2009
    #2
  3. John Ratsey

    John Ratsey Moderately inquisitive Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    7,197
    Messages:
    28,842
    Likes Received:
    2,172
    Trophy Points:
    581
    Performance under load is basically proportional to the clock speed so the SU9400 will be significantly slower (eg 50% longer time) at completing any CPU-intensive tasks.

    However, unless you run any tasks which fully load the CPU for tens of seconds or longer then you are unlikely to notice any performance difference. Overall performance also depends on the HDD (or SSD), memory and GPU performance.

    The best performance comparison would be reviews of the two computers but, while a benchmark such as PCMark05 combines many tests, the result is strongly biased by a dedicated GPU but, in real like, you may not need ot use that dedicated GPU's performance.

    John
     
    John Ratsey, Mar 21, 2009
    #3
  4. Matt

    Matt Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    2,618
    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Hmm. Ok, thanks, Sess. :p

    Too bad, though... I'm pretty sure I don't want to downgrade my processor... (still holding out for T300...)

    I'll take a look at some wPrime benchmarks, though.
     
    Matt, Mar 21, 2009
    #4
  5. Matt

    Matt Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    2,618
    Messages:
    1,757
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Well, I'm going to be taking some programming classes next year and from my experience, Visual Studio can be relatively processor intensive (especially during builds). Also, I sometimes convert videos, which is majorly processor intensive. The SSD would bring major speed improvements, though.
     
    Matt, Mar 21, 2009
    #5
  6. jonlumpkin

    jonlumpkin NBR Transmogrifier

    Reputations:
    826
    Messages:
    3,240
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    You could look at the x200s. The 1.86GHz SL9400 should be at least on par with the T7200 due to the faster FSB and extra L2 cache.

    The x200s also has a 1440x900 LED screen, and is the lightest ThinkPad available. You would have to make do without an internal optical drive and webcam, but these are minor sacrifices.
     
    jonlumpkin, Mar 21, 2009
    #6