Which of these laptops is better?

[Mark Smith]

Hi,

I'm looking at buying a laptop, I hope this isn't too OT as it is
hardware related.

Narrowed my choice down to 2.

Is the 2nd one worth the extra money (considering the architecture is
older)?

I'm also a bit confused as Dell claims 'The fastest mobile processor
on the planet!' for both options...

Thanks for any advice.


Option 1
Intel® Core™ i7-720QM Mobile Processor (1.6GHz, turbo up to 2.8GHz,
6MB L3 Cache)
4096MB 1333MHz Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM [2x2048]
320GB (7,200rpm) Serial ATA Hard Drive
Cost: £699

Option 2
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor P8700 (2.53Ghz, 3MB, 1066MHz)
6144MB 800MHz Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM [1x4096 + 1x2048]
500GB (5.400rpm) SATA Hard Drive
Cost: £799

Link for more info:
http://www1.euro.dell.com/uk/en/hom...aspx?refid=laptop-studio-1555&s=dhs&cs=ukdhs1

 

[Marcel Overweel]

Hi,

I'm looking at buying a laptop, I hope this isn't too OT as it is
hardware related.

Narrowed my choice down to 2.

Is the 2nd one worth the extra money (considering the architecture is
older)?

I'm also a bit confused as Dell claims 'The fastest mobile processor
on the planet!' for both options...

Thanks for any advice.


Option 1
Intel® Core™ i7-720QM Mobile Processor (1.6GHz, turbo up to 2.8GHz,
6MB L3 Cache)
4096MB 1333MHz Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM [2x2048]
320GB (7,200rpm) Serial ATA Hard Drive
Cost: £699

Option 2
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor P8700 (2.53Ghz, 3MB, 1066MHz)
6144MB 800MHz Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM [1x4096 + 1x2048]
500GB (5.400rpm) SATA Hard Drive
Cost: £799

Link for more info:
http://www1.euro.dell.com/uk/en/hom...aspx?refid=laptop-studio-1555&s=dhs&cs=ukdhs1

Option 1:
- much faster (in turbo)
- faster hard drive (7200rpm instead of 5400rpm) you will notice the
difference
- 4GB instead of 6GB doesn't matter much in real-life situations unless
performing very memory hungry operations (3d rendering?)
- Windows 7 PRO

Option 2:
- older architecture
- slower although larger hard drive
- dual channel memory with different size rams using 2 rams instead of 4??
Weird. I thought this wasn't possible. See also:
http://www.techsupportforum.com/har...7540-dual-channel-memory-different-sizes.html
- 6GB instead of 4GB doesn't give much noticeable difference in real-life
situations
- Windows 7 home premium (which can't connect to a network domain, afaik)

Dell claims everything to be good and fast.
It's pure marketing.

I think option 1 is better unless you need more harddrive space (and you
don't care about boot and program loading time) or you can't live with
having 'only' 4GB memory.

Hope this helps.

regards,
Marcel



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4678 (20091211) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

 

[Mark Smith]

"Mark Smith" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
Hi,

I'm looking at buying a laptop, I hope this isn't too OT as it is
hardware related.

Narrowed my choice down to 2.

Is the 2nd one worth the extra money (considering the architecture is
older)?

I'm also a bit confused as Dell claims 'The fastest mobile processor
on the planet!' for both options...

Thanks for any advice.

Option 1
Intel® Core™ i7-720QM Mobile Processor (1.6GHz, turbo up to 2.8GHz,
6MB L3 Cache)
4096MB 1333MHz Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM [2x2048]
320GB (7,200rpm) Serial ATA Hard Drive
Cost: £699

Option 2
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor P8700 (2.53Ghz, 3MB, 1066MHz)
6144MB 800MHz Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM [1x4096 + 1x2048]
500GB (5.400rpm) SATA Hard Drive
Cost: £799

Link for more info:
http://www1.euro.dell.com/uk/en/home/Laptops/laptop-studio-1555/pd.as...

Option 1:
- much faster (in turbo)
- faster hard drive (7200rpm instead of 5400rpm) you will notice the
  difference
- 4GB instead of 6GB doesn't matter much in real-life situations unless
  performing very memory hungry operations (3d rendering?)
- Windows 7 PRO

Option 2:
- older architecture
- slower although larger hard drive
- dual channel memory with different size rams using 2 rams instead of 4??
  Weird. I thought this wasn't possible. See also:
 http://www.techsupportforum.com/hardware-support/motherboards-bios-cp....
- 6GB instead of 4GB doesn't give much noticeable difference in real-life
situations
- Windows 7 home premium (which can't connect to a network domain, afaik)

Dell claims everything to be good and fast.
It's pure marketing.

I think option 1 is better unless you need more harddrive space (and you
don't care about boot and program loading time) or you can't live with
having 'only' 4GB memory.

Hope this helps.

regards,
Marcel

Thanks, that's what I was leaning towards.

Will the fact that the memory is DDR3 instead of DDR2 will make a
marked difference too?

Also, I'm puzzled a bit by the turbo mode. I thought most CPUs these
days intelligently went into a low power mode when not in use? I know
clock speeds aren't that important, but 1.6 GHz does seem a bit on the
slow side. I have an Atom 1.6 GHz netbook, which couldn't play 1080p
H264 HD video files without badly stuttering. Would this laptop be
able to handle that? The presence of HDMI video out would lead me to
hope so...

Thanks again

 

[Mark Smith]

On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 13:16:23 -0800 (PST), Mark Smith


| Thanks, that's what I was leaning towards.
|
| Will the fact that the memory is DDR3 instead of DDR2 will make a
| marked difference too?
|
| Also, I'm puzzled a bit by the turbo mode. I thought most CPUs these
| days intelligently went into a low power mode when not in use? I know
| clock speeds aren't that important, but 1.6 GHz does seem a bit on the
| slow side. I have an Atom 1.6 GHz netbook, which couldn't play 1080p
| H264 HD video files without badly stuttering. Would this laptop be
| able to handle that? The presence of HDMI video out would lead me to
| hope so...
|
| Thanks again

Forgive me if this has already been covered, but I haven't been keeping up with
this thread and older posts are gone.  Does either laptop have a separate
display adapter with its own memory or is each an onboard adapter that shares
system memory?  The ability to play such things as H264 video smoothly usually
has more to do with adapter abilities than with the availability of an HDMI
connection or not.  Of course, good video can make good use of an HDMI port.

Larc

Really? The thread is only a few hours old... Anyway yes they both
have the same dedicated graphics card, a 512MB ATI Mobility RADEON HD
4570

Here is the original link again:

http://www1.euro.dell.com/uk/en/hom...aspx?refid=laptop-studio-1555&s=dhs&cs=ukdhs1

 

[Mark Smith]

"Mark Smith" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
Hi,
I'm looking at buying a laptop, I hope this isn't too OT as it is
hardware related.
Narrowed my choice down to 2.
Is the 2nd one worth the extra money (considering the architecture is
older)?
I'm also a bit confused as Dell claims 'The fastest mobile processor
on the planet!' for both options...
Thanks for any advice.
Option 1
Intel® Core™ i7-720QM Mobile Processor (1.6GHz, turbo up to 2.8GHz,
6MB L3 Cache)
4096MB 1333MHz Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM [2x2048]
320GB (7,200rpm) Serial ATA Hard Drive
Cost: £699
Option 2
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor P8700 (2.53Ghz, 3MB, 1066MHz)
6144MB 800MHz Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM [1x4096 + 1x2048]
500GB (5.400rpm) SATA Hard Drive
Cost: £799
Link for more info:
http://www1.euro.dell.com/uk/en/home/Laptops/laptop-studio-1555/pd.as....
Option 1:
- much faster (in turbo)
- faster hard drive (7200rpm instead of 5400rpm) you will notice the
  difference
- 4GB instead of 6GB doesn't matter much in real-life situations unless
  performing very memory hungry operations (3d rendering?)
- Windows 7 PRO
Option 2:
- older architecture
- slower although larger hard drive
- dual channel memory with different size rams using 2 rams instead of4??
  Weird. I thought this wasn't possible. See also:
 http://www.techsupportforum.com/hardware-support/motherboards-bios-cp...
- 6GB instead of 4GB doesn't give much noticeable difference in real-life
situations
- Windows 7 home premium (which can't connect to a network domain, afaik)
Dell claims everything to be good and fast.
It's pure marketing.
I think option 1 is better unless you need more harddrive space (and you
don't care about boot and program loading time) or you can't live with
having 'only' 4GB memory.
Hope this helps.
regards,
Marcel

Thanks, that's what I was leaning towards.

Will the fact that the memory is DDR3 instead of DDR2 will make a
marked difference too?

Also, I'm puzzled a bit by the turbo mode. I thought most CPUs these
days intelligently went into a low power mode when not in use? I know
clock speeds aren't that important, but 1.6 GHz does seem a bit on the
slow side. I have an Atom 1.6 GHz netbook, which couldn't play 1080p
H264 HD video files without badly stuttering. Would this laptop be
able to handle that? The presence of HDMI video out would lead me to
hope so...

Thanks again

Before you buy a Dell just call tech support.  800-624-9896
For a laugh, just follow the menus to talk to someone about a laptop
for the home.  

After 10 min a tech support answered in broken English.  I explained
my problem, and she put me on hold again.  I was on hold for another
10 min and the phone disconnected.

F$$k Dell.

Yeah never had much need for tech support.

Not sure any company has good support - unless you really want to pay
extra for it?

 

[Paul]

Hi,

I'm looking at buying a laptop, I hope this isn't too OT as it is
hardware related.

Narrowed my choice down to 2.

Is the 2nd one worth the extra money (considering the architecture is
older)?

I'm also a bit confused as Dell claims 'The fastest mobile processor
on the planet!' for both options...

Thanks for any advice.


Option 1
Intel® Core™ i7-720QM Mobile Processor (1.6GHz, turbo up to 2.8GHz,
6MB L3 Cache)
4096MB 1333MHz Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM [2x2048]
320GB (7,200rpm) Serial ATA Hard Drive
Cost: £699

Option 2
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor P8700 (2.53Ghz, 3MB, 1066MHz)
6144MB 800MHz Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM [1x4096 + 1x2048]
500GB (5.400rpm) SATA Hard Drive
Cost: £799

Link for more info:
http://www1.euro.dell.com/uk/en/hom...aspx?refid=laptop-studio-1555&s=dhs&cs=ukdhs1

You can find comparison articles, for rating the effectiveness of the
two processor types. This is just the first link I could find.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Intel-Core-i7-Processor-Clarksfield.21684.0.html

As that article mentions, there could be an impact on battery life, for
the two hardware configurations you show in your table. Maybe they
compensate with a different battery pack ?

The Intel "Spec Update" for 720QM gives some more info on the Turbo Option.

i7-720QM Regular speed is

4 cores * 1.6GHz

Turbo options include

4 cores * 1.73GHz
3 cores * 1.73GHz
2 cores * 2.40GHs
1 core * 2.80GHz

Those are achieved by using different multiplier values, and are adjusted
on the fly. The compute power would also be subject to thermal management.
If the CPU or the computer is overheating, or too much power is drawn,
a lower setting than those shown might be used. The head to head comparison
article above, shows the 720QM is doing a good job.

The part I can't get over, is the difference in price. The P8700 processor
is cheaper, and yet that computer is more expensive. Is that 4GB DIMM
really affecting the price that much ? I'd much rather have a matched
pair, like 2x2GB dual channel.

http://www.intc.com/priceList.cfm

720QM $364
P8700 $209

HTH,
Paul