8662 - Optimal Processor

I'm ordering my Sager NP8662 any day now, especially after seeing how the Asus G51 is just not of the same quality.

I have one final question, regarding the optimal Processor to put in this baby. For the sake of this thread, consider my budget to be infinite.

The options are:

~Intel® Q9000 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Quad 2.0GHz w/6MB L2 On-die cache - 1066MHz FSB
~Intel® P9700 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Duo 2.8GHz w/6MB L2 On-die cache - 1066MHz FSB 25 watt
~Intel® T9900 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Duo 3.06GHz w/6MB L2 On-die cache - 1066MHz FSB 35 watt

I believe these are, easily, the best three options for the 8662, but what one should I choose? They each seem to have their advantages.

I've heard from a (very helpful) member on here that the P9700 is basically just as powerful (with some overclocking) as the T9900 but runs cooler, with less power intake.
And the only benefit I can see from the Quad, is futureproofing, but it doesn't seem worth it for the heat and powerloss it produces.

So basically guys and gals, what one is overall the superior processor? Keeping in mind that I'm going for performance, and longevity of the laptop.

And, as a second mini-question, does it even really matter what processor I get? (for gaming), as the GPU (260) is going to be the deciding factor on whether you can play a game or not.

 

Not sure which to say as well I don't really know.. But I can tell you that the quad core temps can be reduced by simply undervolting, which is very safe.. As for dual core vs quad core, it really depends. At the moment, its pretty even for either and gaming I hope would be similar for any of these CPUs, but quad core as you said, may come in handy for future proofing, as games may start to utilise 4 cores in the future. Also remember that the quicker the CPU can process data the quicker it can push it into the GPU.. Results in better gaming performance.

If your budget is infinite.. I'd say get the Intel Core Quad Extreme Mobile processor (QX9300).. Pretty sure it's the best processor availiable at the moment. Otherwise, any of these three are great and it really depends on your budget, and how much you wish to spend.

 

Im far from an expert, but i just ordered this same laptop. I kept the base processer.

all info i got from reading every thread in these forums the past month, i might be wrong but these were my thoughts on the cpu selection (just ordered last night)

1, base is a pretty fast processer, 2.53 duo is no slouch.
i wanted 25watt just because heat scares me and it runs cooler than 35w so did not even consider any 35w. i really dont know how much that matters but some think it does who are smarter than me so i go with it.

2. theres a huge jump from the q9000 even to just the q9100 if i can trust what i read. so when you go quad you might really want a more powerful one. which you can upgrade a year from now, most likely much cheaper and better by then. at least i think you can, my first laptop is just starting to be build today by xoticpc so take my opinion with a grain of salt probably lol

 

I'm ordering from xotic, and I dont believe they offer the option of the QX9300... you just mean installing it myself? Honestly.. I'm not really feeling like going with a quad core, as I think if I wanted to, it'd just be better to install a better one in the future.

I'm realling leaning towards the P9700 right now, is that the best option? Or would I get more out of the T9900?

 

P9700. If you are gaming, which I feel that's what you are doing, then this would be the best option for you.

 

Even though the T9900 is a little bit faster? Great, thats the type of response I'm looking for haha! Thanks.

On a fairly unrelated side note, can dual cores (such as the P9700) run GTA IV?? Or do you basically NEED a quad core?

 

Highly doubt it, never played the game but they can't really do that.. If the game only ran on quad cores, they would lose huge money as most people don't have quad cores.

In other words, yes it will work perfect I'm pretty sure

As for P9700 vs T9900, there will be an oh so tiny difference I'd say.. You won't notice at all.. maybe 1 - 2 FPS max on certain games.. Just a guess though.

The fact the P9700 runs cooler and less power means it probably has more overclocking potential too, if your into that sorta thing.

 

Yeah thats what I was thinking, just overclocking the P9700to make it a T9900.

Although, I'm mainly into making this laptop last for my duration at University, so what would be more harmful, overclocking the P9700, or simply having the T9900 (with its extra heat+powerintake)?????

 

in the gaming laptop universe yes you are correct in the OP, the gpu is the more defining role in a laptops ability to play the game. Be sure you are looking at the wattage of the laptops aswell. Certainly the p8700/p8600 are not bad in any way shape or form. I personally dont think an extra .16ghz or so is worth another 100 of my dollars but to each his own. there are very minimal differences in actual performace between the levels of cpu's that you can buy. My advice, if money is tight (as being with most in this economy) go with the p8700 and when money is a little more lose, sell it on ebay and get youself a higher level cpu if the p8700 does not cut it for you.

 

From the 3 choices you stated, I'd pick P9700. However, as one of the posters already mentioned above, the base processor P8700 is totally sufficient for gaming. The 3DMark06 score difference between these two (if everything else identical) would be about 5%. You'd never be able to distinguish the difference just by playing. But the difference in price is $165 (xoticpc), for which amount you could buy a decent notebook cooler, gaming mouse and external soundcard. From this perspective, P8700 is the very best choice if your performance concern is primarily related to gaming.

 

You can't overclock CPUs in this notebook, so forget about it.

 

Really? Why not? Heat? Care to go more indepth with that?

 

I say this because for games you are going to see about a 1-3 FPS difference which is almost negligible if you are already running at 50+FPS.

Where it would make a difference would be for time based number crunching stuff like video encoding or 3d rendering. Then I'd say take the T9900 or even better the Quad.

 

Ive got the P9700 in my setup and i love it, its fast, calves through games like a hot knife through butter, does all my processing needs with minimal fuss, basically really really happy with the upgrade......i had a P8600 in my old laptop, and ive noticed quite a big leap in performance, maybe its having the extra cache.....

 

Too true. Some people state that they don't notice the difference but I think the extra cache IS pretty notable. Then again, maybe it's just the effect of going up more than a over 1Ghz in clock speed.

 

An article in Tom's Hardware from 2007 dealt with that issue (performance gain via extra cache). They measured 2 processors with an identical clock speed but different cache sizes. One was 2MB and the other one 4MB. They ran several tests and came to the conclusion that a larger cache size indeed improves performance. However, the improvement was contained to a single digit % in almost all tests.

mtness, did your old notebook have the same memory capacity and GPU as your current one? I think not and I think that's the primary reason for the performance gain you are witnessing. Anyway, P9700 is an awsome CPU just a tad more expensive than I am willing to accept.

 

I have been gaming just fine with the Q9000 and I never need to use my laptop for very long on battery so that was never a consideration. There is no reason not to go for this CPU for gaming since even in dual core optimised games, it is still more than enough.

 

well actually i wasnt talking about in game performance increase(not a very fair comparison), i was talking about CPU intensive things like video conversion, data transfer and translation tools...my old machine as i said had the P8600 and 4gb DDR3 ram (sxps16) and this processor destroys it in converting videos for my Ipod, performing the tasks with the 3 translation tools i use......and transfering data from my external 1TB harddrive.......im not saying its a must have processor but im very very happy with the increased perfomance and think it was worth the money i spent on the upgrade......goodluck with your choice......

 

Fair enough. I don't want to sound like "everyone who buys anything over P8700 is a fool throwing his money away". But there should be a good reason/function for the higher processors - such as yours. Then the extra cost is perfectly justified. However, the vast majority of M860TU owners (myself including) will never do any of the CPU highly demanding tasks (such as video rendering, AUTOCAD-like programs etc or TB transfers). And too many of these express congnitive dissonance when it comes to choosing the CPU for the wrong reason - fear of diminished gaming performance. I have worked with P8700 on a notebook that had only 2GB of RAM and a very basic integrated Intel GPU. The tasks that I would normally perform included: 5-6 IE windows constantly opened (of which 2 running very demanding java applets), 2 trading applications running, 2 charting programs running, Internet radio (via SoundBlaster output) constantly on, YM messenger constantly on, occasssional use of Microsoft Office applications and image editing programs (nothing too demanding), frequent AV checks, daily cleanup by Evidence Eliminator, smaller uploads/downloads/conversions (never exceeding 1GB per day) ... and some other minor tasks. The P8700 CPU never failed performing all these taks in a rather brisk manner.