np8690

Yes, some QX Q9x beat the i7 mobiles in applications with proper thread optimization, but that's due to higher native clock speeds. If you compare along the lines of un-optimized code, the mobile i7 turbo boost kicks in and things become much less clear.

You can see from your link that SuperPi, which is a single threaded app, shows the i7 series handily beating the C2D quad cores. The i7 is an attempt to provide quad core performance while not sacrificing performance for those applications that don't properly support multi-cpu / mult-threaded implementations.

Since we're still in a state between legacy apps and newly optimized apps, I think the i7 is the way to go. If we were in a world where every app properly supported multi-threading, then I think I would agree with your last post, but unfortunately, that's not the case.

 

My problem with the little hopped up Mobile i7's... is the heat.. 132w under use equals heat.. and the fact that they over clock themselves.. but max out less than that rate.. 1 core.. great.. so who uses one core at a time... other than testing and shutting the other 3 down on purpose..

So averag user.. not me or one of you guys who are pro's.. just average user..

Has how many applications open at a time..

let me ask it a different way...

How many applications are running that the average user knows nothing about in the back ground?

So I would say the average user.. is a tool... and works thier computer harder than anyone of us undeer load.. on accident of course.. and all crapware.. but working the out of the cpu / gpu and so on..

As for returning the HDX 18 on order.. for the new DV-8...

My problem is..

New CPU.. that runs hot and does not out perform a Q-9000.. the mobile i7 820 w32 prime marks are the most accurate (IMHO) way to see what any chip can do.. there are dual cores that out perform the Mobile i7's...

and on to... the Video Card... Newer than the Chip...

and then on to Windows 7... now.. guys before you take me out behind the barn and shoot me.. I am not you guys.. I do really lack a real skill set software wise.. I can build hardware or more accurately add hardware to make a machine a speedy tank.. but C++ and or any other is outside my kernel disabling ways..

So Windows 7 will be buggy.. its new.. it always starts that way.. I here the testing crowd stepping up.. I asked RageMan, DanKnee, Thanatopolis.. any of you Ninjas to help me justify putting Windows 7 in my partners (Business) hands... and David makes me look like a Ninja / Pro..

and we all know I am not the Ninja / Pro.. so dumb guy (Love him like a Brother, but not a computer friendly person) calls me every time the thing goes down.. thus costs how much an hour to child proof a new Operating System? That is out of house.. for me.. once again I would Love to have yalls skill sets combined.. I would Love to be Ninja / Jedi / Pro.. but alas.. tis not to be this day or any other..

So if one of you(s) wants to sound off.. who I know and trust.. and tell me.. Windows 7 is not that buggy.. with a new chip and new GPU.. I will cancel and we (meaning we will bench mark his verse ours, GREAT upside there) will play with his new DV-8..

Thanks in advance, JW

http://www.hphdx.net/Forum/tabid/55/forumid/6/threadid/2049/scope/posts/threadpage/4/Default.aspx

That is part of a conversation held at anohter site...

But there are portions which address the single core arguement..

Be well, JW

 

I might add the that LOVE the look of the Clevo.. LOVE IT! If I could oder one that is an 18.4 inch screen.. it would be done same day..

But the i7 mobile issue goes well beyond just the Beautiful Clevo..

I am a larger person.. so an 18 inch laptop to me is a 13 inch laptop to a normal size person.. my hands would not fit on the clevo.. but I have been hawking it for a while..

Dream machine (and all off topic so sorry puriests) the frame of the 8690 grown or stretched to an 18 inch frame but looks exactly the same save a full size number pad.. with a i7 (not mobile) 4 channel dimm (like the HP Envy now has) for 16GB or more Ram.. and Raid 5.. with 3 drives.. for me to SSD's and a 500gb mirror.. The screen would be dual lamp 1900 X 1200..

But I will say again.. I love this little laptop.. I am thinking for my significant other.. it would fit her.. and I would get to tinker with it..

But my next purchase.. without a doubt.. Clevo.. and from all of the Great things I have heard about Justin.. and seen him type.. (I know he has to sell machines, but seems like a real computer lover).. I will buy Xotic..

Unless someone has a better idea.. RK was not so friendly as a side note.

Be well, JW

 

Okay, I probably don't know enough about the wprime benchmark but I ran 32M 3 times on my 8960 and my score was between 12-13 each time (with default thread count of 8) That seems to be better than the Q9000 scores or am I reading/running this wrong. thanks.

 

I'm not saying you don't have a valid argument, I just think for most people an adequately cooled mobile i7 is not an issue, regardless of the increased power requirements. CPU temperature is a product of two factors, power consumption (heat as a byproduct) and cooling. This is why people do crazy things like liquid cooling.

From what I've looked at, I haven't seen the CPU temp on the NP8690 get anywhere near a level which would cause me concern, largely due to the good job of cooling by Clevo/Sager. I think a prime example of what you're arguing is the Asus G51 series (in particular, the G51j with i7). Temps are really hot, and that would concern me.

As for performance, I think we've seen it can be skewed either way depending on how you look at it. Since the Q9xx is really the tock to the i7 tick, performance is not going to be too terribly far off in either direction.

I agree, I do wish there was an 18.4" version myself. I would love a desktop but I'm just not going to have on sit on my dining room table, and an 18.4" with the NP8690 would be the perfect match. Always nice to dream..

 

That's the thing with quoting notebookcheck.. They don't give enough info on their testing systems to determine how accurately the results compare across the board. It wouldn't surprise me if that was the case (that your 820QM was faster in wPrime than the Q9000). Maybe JWnFL will be kind enough to run it on his Q9000 and give us his scores.

 

Notebook check lists 2 scores of 13 and 41...and then they averaged them to get the final score. I couldn't find the sources of their scores and 41 seems entirely off under default settings.

 

Can you please show benchmarks that proves the dual cores out perform the mobile i7's in w32 prime. I have looked up all benchmarks and couldn't come up with any. When I get home today I will post W32 prime results which I already have been getting in the low teens. And the mobile i7 does not come close to have any heat issues in a Sager NP8690.

 

Here are my wprime scores with the i7-820

32M - 12.79 sec
1024M - 409.705 sec

 

Here's a link of a list I found while googling for wprime scores. From the looks of it, the mobile i7 (compared to score posted by user above) falls right into the thick of things along with all the other overclocked DESKTOP quad cores. The fastest dual core which is a desktop processor overclocked still falls behind the mobile i7. I'm interested to find out why JWnFl is under an impression that a mobile i7 isn't impressive.

http://forum.xcpus.com/xtreme-benchmarking/5226-wprime-multi-threaded-benchmark.html

 

I splurged, just bought one from xoticpc!

 

Nice! You'll love it. Welcome to the family.

 

im so on the edge to buy one myself still on the fence regarding the m15x

 

I am BIOS locked with an HP machine.. the numbers to me.. speak more directly to Torque verses horepower..

The i7-720qm with a 6mb cache would be as close to apples to apples as we could get.. but I do know of a certain English man that posts here who I have never spoken with directly but comes off as a GREAT! Sport.. so maybe we could enlist his skil with tinkering..

Make no mistake the clevo.. with a copper sleave or pad inside the removable door and all that they do.. is far beyond the HP I own..

The primary concern.. for performance... would be longevity..

Heat equals a quicker death in laptops to my experience..

and intersting read..

***** "The new Clarksfield i7-920XM isn't substantially faster than the old Core 2 QX9300 when it comes to running highly threaded code. The problem is that when running highly threaded code, Clarksfield's Turbo modes aren't able to fully activate. We end up with a Core i7 running at 2.26 GHz compared to a Core 2 running at 2.53 GHz, and overall performance is relatively close. Clarksfield is 6% faster in SMP CINEBENCH, 14% faster in the second x264 pass, and 12% faster at DivX encoding. The first x264 pass is basically a tie.' *****

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3647&p=5

as well... more to my HDX geared crowd... but the numbers will hold true.. unless talking about the HP envy with its 4 channel dimm and 16gb or DDR3 Ram...

http://tech.tbreak.com/2009/10/intel-corei7-820qm-mobile-cpu-benchmarks/

 

i leave for 1 day and THIS...

ok, i heard from PCTORQUE they were out till early nov.

 

The best I can do would be post a 3rd party with multiple test ran...

1 Intel Core i7 (Desktop) 975 Bloomfield 1333 1 MB + 8 MB 3333 130 45 4 X 12

2 Intel Core i7 (Desktop) 950 Bloomfield 1333 1 MB + 8 MB 3060 130 45 4 X 13

3 Intel Core i7 (Desktop) 920 Bloomfield 1333 1 MB + 8 MB 2660 130 45 4 X 15

4 Intel Core i5 (Desktop) 750 Lynnfield 1 MB + 8 MB 2660 95 45 4 X 13

9 Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9300 Penryn 1066 12 MB 2530 45 45 4 X 18

41 Intel Core 2 Quad Q9000 Penryn 1066 6 MB 2000 45 45 4 X 22

13 Intel Core 2 Duo T9900 Penryn 1066 6 MB 3060 35 45 2 X 15

8 Intel Core i7 820QM Clarksfield 1 MB + 8 MB 1730 45 45 4 X 14

19 Intel Core 2 Extreme X9000 Penryn 800 6 MB 2800 44 45 2 X 17

20 Intel Core 2 Extreme X7900 Merom 800 4 MB 2800 44 65 2 X 2461

28 Intel Core 2 Duo P9500 Penryn 1066 6 MB 2530 25 45 2 X 18

21 Intel Core i7 720QM Clarksfield 1 MB + 6 MB 1600 45 45 4 X 16

34 Intel Core 2 Duo P8700 Penryn 1066 3 MB 2530 25 45 2 X 20

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile...deskornote=&month=&or=&search=&sort=wprime_32

 

we're getting OT again

 

Nice...

I am haggling with a Girl (Woman) over the benefit of a real computer verse a 13 inch netbook.. it kills me she just does not get the difference.. well she does but.. she wants small just to have small.. the other option is the envy in its 13 inch configuration.. which I have no doubt which laptop is better built..

I want a CELVO! even if it is hers..

 

He asked for numbers.. I did the best I could do.. sorry to be off topic talking about the chips performance?

 

The 820qm in that run is flawed. The 2 benchmarks used are very inconsistent. My benchmark run with an 820 shows it falling in line with the i5 (desktop) 750. I don't see any sources from notebookcheck and without that I don't think you can validate any of those runs.

 

LOL. You will have to rely on Notebookcheck.com with a grain of salt.

Core i-7 820qm

 

Notebookcheck is like the Heathkidd of benchmarks.

 

Haha. Best analogy of the day! Btw, where's heathkidd? Sorry off topic.

 

I lol'd so hard at that comment. I approve this message.

 

He's probably painting his M860TU honey bee yellow. Heathkidd wanted a war, so he got one. Nobody messes with the Soviet.

 

Bro.. I am sold.. I found notebookreview after I bought my HDX.. I admit I am a total NOOB!.. but the community of Clevo owners here.. sold me as much as the beauty of the Clevo art work..

I am a laptop Junkie... now just to trick my significant other into one..

You guys are all great.. and that means just as much as the computer to me..

I am thankful you guys are around.. sounds corny but I dont care..

My best to you and yours, JW

 

Welcome to the love of the community.

 

Bone stock with BIOS locked..

HP HDX 18t

Q-9000

8GB or DDR3

wPrime v200 32M
W32 Prime Score
Date Submitted: 20/Oct/2009 10:50:52
Result: 19.924 sec
Views: 0
CPU Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9000 @ 2.00GHz
Core: Yorkfield R0
Clock: 1596 MHz
Front-side-bus: 1064 MHz
Cache Size: 6144 KB
VCore: 1.363 V
Motherboard Quanta 3610
Memory 8192 MB DDR2
Clock: 0 MHz
Timings: 7-7-7-20

Someone mentioned if I turn on the virtual Machine in BIOS that I may get a better score? does that sound right? they said fan always on and VM on..

Thanks in advance for the advice..

Be well, JW

 

I just ran mine.. 54.86 seconds for 32M. (T5400)

Just a couple more months until I order the i7...

 

Well I may not be one of the ninjas you are referring to or quite sure what you mean by locking it down, but I have been testing Win7 through beta, RC, and RTM and it's great. I wouldn't call it buggy at all. Far from it. Actually while I wait for my NP8690 to arrive I have a new copy of Windows 7 Ultimate Signature Edition starring at me from my desk... best endorsement I can give.

 

Nice Rig Bro!

and ummmmm... GO CANES!

But seriously.. Thanks for the info..

I do lack a real skill set software wise.. and like any good noob.. I am trying to build (hardware wise) a machine that is note worthy and thus makes me worthy of the tribe..

Once again Thanks for the info.. Damn nice of you top help.. but the Clevo crowd / family is great..

Be well, JW

 

Someone helped me learn how to do a screen shot..

not that mine is close or even better.. and with HP's locked BIOS.. well..

any way.. heres mine and sorry I didnt know how to do this yesterday..

Thanks for the push to get me on the bench it myself road.. that does make a lot more sense that sighting someone else.. and the 1 second wPrime champion.. I am going to see what he is running today.. but a i7-975 wiht 32gb or ram... 5 slc ssd's in a raid configuration?

Thanks for eveything and my best to you and yours, JW

P.S. Does anyone know how I can get my chip un-stuck from the 1596 mhz level and get it up to its natural clock of 2000 mhz? or am I crazy? dont answer that.. am I thinking of this correctly? should that number be higer? and is it power saving mode or is the chip stuck in 2nd gear? Thanks for any help.

 

Nice score! and fish!

 

No problem!


and GO NOLES!!
========;;;>>

 

the q9000 and qX9300 are laptop chips, but the q9300, which is what you said, is a desktop chip

qx9300 = http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLB5J

q9300 (lga775 socket) = http://processorfinder.intel.com/Details.aspx?sSpec=SLAWE

 

QX9300 @2.93 gets around 14.3 sec, so the 820M is technically faster. Truth be told, for gaming you wouldn't notice a difference between the two. And the QX9300 would produce better results in 3dmark (400-4100~ in 06).

 

Sorry on the typo.. my bad..

Be well, JW