Core 2 duo vs. I7

Can someone explain what is the best here and why.

45nm Intel® Core™ i7-720QM Processor (1.60GHz), 6MB L3 Cache, mPGA-989

45nm Intel® Core™ i7-820QM Processor (1.73GHz), 8MB L3 Cache, mPGA-989


or

45nm Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor P9700 / 6MB L2 Cache, 2.80GHz, 1066MHz FSB [+$165.00]

45nm Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T9900 / 6MB L2 Cache, 3.06GHz, 1066MHz FSB [+$355.00]

45nm Intel® Core™ 2 Quad Processor Q9000 / 6MB L2 Cache, 2.0GHz, 1066MHz FSB [+$160.00]


How is a I7 1.6 or 1.73 better than a core 2 duo 2.8, 3.06 or a quad 2.0?

Is the Core 2 3.06 better than the i7 1.6 at the least?

Thanks. I just dont get how they have such low frequencies but are supposadly so much better.

 

The 820QM is the best, following by 720QM. I'm not getting into the why, you can do a search, it's been discussed quite a bit.

 

The i7 processors are better due to Turbo Mode (self-overclocking). General consensus on these boards is that the 820QM is the best bang for the buck.

 

The i7-720 can compete with the QX9300 in multi-threaded application and will beat it in single threaded application. Against the core 2 duo it range from owning it to similar. Overall i7 is the way to go but not sure if the 820 is really worth it over the 720. Check on anandtech they have quite a few benchmark

By the way comparing the frequencies between generation mean nothing like you can't really compare Intel frequencies to amd

 

look before post?
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=420976

 

820 has all the properties of the 920 sans unlocked status (which is dependent on the system makers allowing you to OC it, and so far, no PRODUCTION level system has that capability yet) and has the best turbo/OC % versus the 720 and 920 (77%).

If you're going to blow $400 on a 720, I'd pony up $200 more for an 820 personally. I tried to mentally justify an Extreme chip, but right now $1150 is $550+ more than a 820 @ $600 and that is crazy.

The problem with a 720 is the resale value is going to be low, since it is the entry level chip that by default will be offered by every system maker and will only appeal to DIY'ers. Still, it will give you the bulk of the performance of a 820 and 920 and save you $200 over the 820 or $750 over the extreme chip and even with a 720, the GPUs on the market today are STILL the bottleneck, so whether you go with a 720, 820 or 920, all three will basically be under utilized with the current crop of mobile CPUs. Even the games that are CPU dependent won't suddenly supremely perform differently between a 720 and 920 IMHO.

 

I'm not worried about resale with the 720 as much as "it will give you the bulk of the performance of a 820 and 920 and save you $200 over the 820 or $750 over the extreme chip and even with a 720, the GPUs on the market today are STILL the bottleneck".

Plus in 1-2 years when there are newer faster i7 mobile CPUs and DX11 GPUs that are hopefully compatible with the W860CU, I won't mind upgrading as much.

 

w860cu lets u set it to 1-4x on the 920xm making it OC'able via the bios

 

Yeah, I saw that (after I wrote my previous post), but again, if that is 3.73ghz turbo mode / single core....eh.....

It still doesn't justify the price since even a 720 is overkill for all GPU bound gaming out there, especially if you go 1920x1080 versus 1600x900.

Anyone who wants to pony up $1145 for a 920xm, be my guest. I sincerely hope your designated laptop usage is very mission critical and insanely CPU bound.

 

Someone needs to report it's OC ability on 2 or more cores. Single core numbers mean jack to us.

 

^yeah, what is all the fuzz about being able to OC a single lol-core sky-high?

Give us some OC with the rest of the cores, atleast two cores.

 

You will get no disagreement here, Kevin.