Sony's Z line, and P8400 vs. P8600 with an SSD

In looking to pick up a laptop and have it in my hands by late next week, I found that I had to go with the 2.26 GHz processor from the P-series. I was hoping for 2.4 GHz or better.

The reason I was willing to do so was that the notebook is coming equipped with an OCZ Vertex SSD at 120 GB. My take is that the hard drive is still the bottleneck, so a mere 140 MHz difference in the presence of an SSD isn't going to be felt, and that a 2.4 GHz processor + SSD isn't going to really be snappier compared to a 2.26 GHz one with an SSD for most things.

Am I right on this? Short of lengthy, CPU-intensive tasks, how much of a difference would that 140 MHz really make?

 

Yes you are right. For the SSD performance it won't matter at all.

For normal tasks, not CPU intensive, it won't matter at all.

For CPU intensive tasks there will a small difference (5%). But only when both cores are used for 100%.

 

Thanks, Phil.

Anyone else have any experience with this? I imagine I'm just splitting hairs.

 

These two CPUs won't make a difference as long as they have the same L2 cache size - 3MB. If one has 6MB it's gonna make a difference.

However, MLC SSD is vastly faster than mechanical hdd on random access read.

 

You are. When my Z was out in Japan for repair (P9500 2.53GHz), I prchaed a temporary Z610 from Best Buy with the 2.4GHz (P8600 I believe). In processing power, I didnt' notice any difference. I did notice the difference in the 7200rpm drive in the Z610 vs. the RAIDed drives in my Z90, though.

So I/O will be more of your issue than anything else ... as it always has been with laptops.

 

Good call on that. I am looking at a Z540 and the processor is only 2.26 GHz but I wasn't too concerned. The processor in my M1530 is 2.2 GHz and my Vaio FW had a 2.4GHz processor. I never really felt much of a difference in performance so I figured it'd be worth it to save the money. I would mostly be interested in how they impact the battery life. The manufacturers say that the T9xxx processors are most efficient, but that just sounds like a gimmick to get someone to buy a four hundred dollar upgrade.

Out of curiosity, is your username a reference to the Precision bass?

 

Ok, seeing as they still sell the Z54/3 with a 2.4 processor is there any reason why you have to settle with a 2.26ghz processor?

 

There's a somewhat hefty price difference I'd say. You can get the 2.26 for pretty cheap but as soon as you look for the 2.4, you're in the $1500 range give or take.

 

Judging by the OP's other thread in the WNSIB forum they are considering spending more on a Macbook.

They won't notice the difference but it might be something that might bug them in the future. I know that i have experienced this in the past.

I don't know where they are planning to buy from but PI offers the 2.4 processor for $80 more than the 2.26 processor.
http://portableone.com/search.asp?sp_flag=0&sp=vgnz

 

Rachel,

It's mostly a matter of time. The 2.26 GHz should be arriving within the next day or two, whereas the 2.4 GHz would need to be ordered by P1.

I was hoping to have it by tomorrow.

I hate feeling like I'm settling, but I'm not sure if I should just shut up because the thing's coming with a top-shelf SSD in it.

 

Most people think they're going to notice the difference between 2.26 or 2.4Ghz. In reality almost no one will.

Simply because:
- the difference is only noticeable when both CPU cores are utilized for 100%, something that rarely happens for most users.
- the difference is small, only 5%. That means that a job that will take the P8400 20 seconds, will take the P8600 19 seconds.

 

Yes, it is.

 

I don't know the context of what you mentioned above what I quoted hehe. Anyway, you can get a Z540 P8400 1GB RAM 120GB 5400 for $1,146.80 at Pcnation free shipping no tax. So if one is to replace the HDD to an SSD anyway and the RAM, then that's as barebone of a bargain as you can get. If you're looking at a 2.4, it's around $1500, not trying to sound redundant of course.

Could have been an idea, but looks like the OP gave his reasons.

 

Awesome. Howdy from a fellow bass player.

I see that the difference in speed is negligible for most people (and certainly can agree with wanting to save money on unnecessary upgrades) , but would it be worthwhile for tasks like video editing and HD rendering? I've taken a liking to video editing and would like to be able to continue that task on the Z. I like the Z540 for the price, but the processor in the Z690 is faster and it has a slightly higher resolution (which would help make room for the video editing software to be displayed). I realize that a 13.1" screen isn't the optimal setting to be doing a lot of editing, but I'm an amateur/hobbyist so I can get by.

It is really based on cost. If the extra $400 is worth it for the benefits (1600x900 screen, 2.4GHz processor vs 2.26GHz, more recent refresh of the line, and free neoprene sleeve [which I love; I prefer to just use my backpack so that is what I would buy anyway]) I could be swayed towards that. Truth be told, I want to want the Z690 but need to focus on cost versus performance and usability gains.