I feel like we need a topic where we can discuss hardware, mainly CPU/GPUs, and have all the information about such within a single topic. I would like this topic to be a place to ask questions concerning hardware, as well as a place for posting up interesting information about things like performance charts, comparisons, etc.

Clarksfield.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_microprocessors#.22Clarksfield.22_.2832_nm.29

Arrandale.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors#.22Arrandale.22_.28standard_voltage.3B_32_nm.29

TechArp Charts.
http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=88&pgno=7

So I've found some new information lately about the type of laptop I'm going to need for college, and I'm basically going to need the very best laptop I can get, that is still around 14.1" in screen size. I'm also going to have to learn all about the i5-i7 cores due to the LGA 775 socket being too outdated for me to buy for the purposes I need it for.

So for my first question, I would like to know how much better an i7 720 QM is compared to a i5 430M in terms of performance//power consumption. I'm used to checking out the LGA 775 socket, where you can pretty much tell how well something will perform by simply looking at the clock speed. I'm assuming this isn't the case, because this i5 has a core speed of 2.26GHz (dual core), and the i7 has a clock speed of 1.6GHz (quad).

Also, in those charts, I'm assuming that the higher the frequency the better (third column from the left). Although, the i5-5xxM, i5-5xxE models have about 2400 MHZ frequency, where the i7 QMs has about 1650 MHz frequency. What does that mean? If the i7 is better, why does the i5 have such higher of a frequency?

Post has been edited 3 time(s), last time on Jan 20 2010, 2:07 pm by CecilSunkure.

The 720 has a higher cache (usually matters quite a bit in games), supports HT, ect.

Think of it like this:
We know an E6850 clocks higher than an E8200 @ stock, we're disregarding overclocking here.
The E8200 is a newer design, has a smaller manufacturing process, and more cache.
We know the E8200 is going to use less power and out preform the E6850 in most if not all applications.

Same concept on the mobile i5s/i7s, though in this case, the i5 is 32nm, however it still isn't better.

The i7 720QM has hyperthreading, meaning it has 8 processing threads, 2 for each of its 4 cores, while the 430m is limited to 1 thread per core.

The i5 430m has an IGP, or integrated graphics processor. Just like a motherboard that has onboard graphics, if you're not in need of it/going to be using it, you want to avoid it.

Its really all the same reasons an i7 920 outclasses and i5 650 on the desktop.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jan 20 2010, 6:23 am by Excalibur.

Ah, thanks Ex.

If you look here: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2034940032%201039349576&name=Intel%20Core%20i7

None of those laptops get any smaller than a 15.6" screen. Do you think this is because the i7 lineup is just new, so there aren't many options? I very much so want to find a laptop with screen smaller than this, weighing hopefully at around 7 lbs. Do you think in the near future options like this will open up? How long do you think until more options and more deals become available, and by more.. I mean any relevant change.

Yes, the i7 lineup is not only a high end lineup, but its also very new to the mobile market. I'd say in the next few months we'll see more options.

School doesn't start for 7 months, right? You've got plenty of time to do your research. Just hang out on /g/.

While a 14.1" screen is nice, I think the 15.6" would be the max I could handle. That also happens to be pretty much the minimum laptop manufacturers want to put on decent GFX. With the i5 mobile allendales out, I don't think there could be a much better processor, considering its laptop status. i7 is obviously a stronger processor, but also has the disadvantage of being fairly expensive.

As for graphics, you pretty much want anything in the 4xxx or 2xx midrange. Cheap 5xxx laptops aren't going to come out for a while. 3xx are just rebrands.

As for IGP, I think it's stupid how we currently have it set up. There should be no reason you can't have an IGP run the simple stuff, such as windows, and when a game runs, the dedicated powers up. Alas, the only people to do such things have failed miserably or are apple.

As for the 1.6 GHz i7, I think the core overclocks itself depending on the situation, up to its max of 2.8 GHz. However I think it only happens when you've got a single process running and 3 idle cores. What's important is that you can really only compare a processor by its clock speed if it has the same cache and architecture. For example, and e8200, e8300, e8400, and e8500 are all the same, just different clock speeds based on the quality of the wafer. The center of the wafer is the best, so they usually use those in their "extreme" processors, and proceed on outwards. In fact, that's one of the reasons why PowerPC stopped being used. Intel killed them by selling a 1.6 GHz x86 processor which performed the same as a 1.0 GHz PowerPC processor. Most people see the larger number and want that. Intel continued this trend in the p4 market to disastrous results, though they did end up with some 8 GHz processors (overclocked with He).

Okay, I wanted to know of some of the opinions around here on how this card, the ATI 5730 or ATI 5870, compares to the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 360M.

Since I've heard from a few people around here that the 3xx series are just rebrands, I'm assuming the 5xxx series is going to dominate, but I wanted to hear some opinions. Also, is there anything better mobile GPU wise than the ATI 5xxx series?

Can anyone comment on the differences in performance capabilities between the two ATI links I gave? It looks like the 5870 is immensely better, but I honestly don't know which numbers in the links I posted are really relevant.

[Edit]Also, if I were to purchase extra RAM for my laptop, does anyone have any recommendations or general knowledge about RAM I should know?

Post has been edited 4 time(s), last time on Mar 9 2010, 8:11 pm by CecilSunkure.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-5730.23825.0.html

http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-5870.23073.0.html

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTS-360M.24058.0.html

Should tell you everything you need to know.

5870 > 360 > 5730 in a simplified manner of speaking.

RAM has a few things to consider: Type (DDR1/2/3), capacity (1/2/4GB), frequency (533/800/1066/1333/1600), voltage (1.4-1.65v) and timings/latency (4-4-4-12, 5-5-5-15, 7-7-7-24).

For DDR3 which is the current standard, lower latency even if at a lower frequency is usually better. Right now RAM is capacity and latency limited way before its frequency limited. We've seen sticks running DDR3 1066 beat DDR3 1600 by having a lower latency, especially in the command rate which usually isn't listed but is 1T or 2T. However, unless you're benchmarking, and this is generally speaking remember, in real world application you won't notice much of a difference. Your main concerns should be the following:
Does the laptop support X amount of RAM?
Does the voltage/timing/freq match the RAM already in the system?

8800 GT = 9800 GT = GT 250. They're all based on the g92 core, with minor improvements as they go along. Still excellent cards, but 3 year old tech.
GTS 260 = GTS 360. Since top of the line 3 years ago is the 250, you can guess that the 260/360 isn't much better.

Hope that gives you some information on what the GTS 360 actually is. Also, nVidia rebrands at the request of OEM manufacturers who want their product to seem "new". That's why the 9000 and 300 series exist.

I would actually put the 5730 above the GTS 360, since 520 > 413. The 5780 is 1.2 TFLOPs though, so it's WAY overkill.

Does anyone have any laptop coolers they are willing to recommend? I've been looking around for a while now, and a lot of them seem pretty cheap and flimsy. I'm not taking laptop size into consideration at all, or where the heated areas of the laptop are, I was just wondering if anyone knew of anything they would recommend performance wise.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Mar 12 2010, 10:35 pm by CecilSunkure.

According to newegg http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834998051 is nice just going by reviews. Honestly for a cooling pad, anything that isn't your lap and has a fan is fine.

Due to me being me and loving fans and doing crazy shit, I'd say measure your laptop, get 2 pieces of acrylic, size it for 4 fans to sandwich between them, drill the needed holes and screws and such, and hook it all up. For the price of 4 decent fans and how cheap acrylic is, its only a little bit more expensive then the cheaper cooling pads, and will probably cool very nicely.

Me and my dad ran a giant aluminum tube from my desk to my window to draw in cool air and stuck a fan in the near end of it. Works great, I highly recommend this setup. Keeps the GPU temp at least 10C cooler than usual, and as much as 20C cooler.

I have an Xpad on top and an Antec on the bottom
http://www.amazon.com/Xpad-Non-slip-Laptop-Cooler-Heatshield/dp/B000PH2E3E/
I think the airflow from the antec screwed up my old laptop so I stop using it. The antec is now just a inch raise for better airflow. The xpad makes it like 5C cooler.

Based on the pictures, that thing looks like it would block the air intake on my laptop computer or at least not give any additional space underneath the air intake.