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.

    SU7300 vs SL9400

    Discussion in 'Lenovo' started by perfectionseeker, Feb 10, 2010.

  1. perfectionseeker

    perfectionseeker Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    41
    Messages:
    521
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    30
    I have noticed a few cheaper X200s models with an SU3500 1.3 Ghz CPU in it ... the price difference is a fair bit, but is this more like a netbook experience? SL9400 must be much faster correct? Maybe I should just stick to an X200 and carry the extra 200 grams for a lot more raw power ...?
     
  2. Tinderbox (UK)

    Tinderbox (UK) BAKED BEAN KING

    Reputations:
    4,745
    Messages:
    8,513
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    431
  3. perfectionseeker

    perfectionseeker Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    41
    Messages:
    521
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Sorry my fault I meant SL9400 at 1.86 Ghz
     
  4. jonlumpkin

    jonlumpkin NBR Transmogrifier

    Reputations:
    826
    Messages:
    3,240
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    It's quite a bit worse than that. The su7300 is a Core SOLO ( source), although the TDP is only 5.5w and it is significantly better than an atom. The SL9400 has a faster FSB, double the L2 cache, and is a Core DUO ( source). Therefore, I would expect the SL9400 to perform 150-200% better in properly threaded applications and at least 40% better in CPU bound single threaded applications. Conversely, the difference between an SL9400 and a P8600 is far smaller (slight clock speed boost, same FSB, half the cache, both DUO).

    All that being said, a great many applications are IO rather than CPU bound. So if the reduced price allowed you to get a quality SSD, then the trade off may be worth it depending on your workload.
     
  5. aznguyphan

    aznguyphan Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    207
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Ummm the typos in this thread is making this confusing. The SU3500 is a core solo that is more like a netbook but snappier and will struggle with HD flash without 10.1. It will play 1080P video well.

    The SU7300 is a Core 2 Duo and I don't think it comes in the x200s(it does in Europe).

    And if you're wondering whether to go with a x200 and a full power processor or a x200s with a Core Solo, then you need to think about what you want out of a computer and how much you want to be pay because those options are far too different for us to be deciding for you.
     
  6. talin

    talin Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    4,694
    Messages:
    5,343
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    205
    The SU7300 is a Core 2 Duo. :) Also the SU2300 is a dual core Celeron, the SU3500 is a Core 2 Solo. ;)
     
  7. perfectionseeker

    perfectionseeker Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    41
    Messages:
    521
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Yes sorry made a mistake in the title of the thread ! OK well Jon there is no nice SSD to offset the Core Solo CPU disadvantage. I actually found a nice computer Samsung P210 that has it all, but it weighs 1.95 KG ! Far too much for me. Am still really not sure about X200 series and the screen quality holds me back. If the screen is not better than the T400 well I don't know. I don't really have any use for a Tablet but maybe I should get one ?