1.Go to Link 2.Add to Shopping cart for $829 (before $130 instant discount) 3.At Checkout apply EXTRA $200 off Special Coupon Code: USPU3749541 [Exp. 02/24/2010 or After 250 uses] Final Price : $829 - $130 instant - $200 coupon = $499 + Free Shipping + Tax
Stranger2000 said: 1.3GHz processor laptops? Did I time travel back to 2001?
Seriously, I bought my 2GHz laptop like six years ago. Are these for collectors, or people looking for a slower, more leisurely pace of life?
Yea, everyone knows that raw CPU speed is what makes them better. Heck I have a 3.2GHz Pentium 4, and now all we have is 2GHz dual core cpus. Sheesh, we aren't getting anywhere like this.
Paperbag said: Stranger2000 said: 1.3GHz processor laptops? Did I time travel back to 2001?
Seriously, I bought my 2GHz laptop like six years ago. Are these for collectors, or people looking for a slower, more leisurely pace of life?
Yea, everyone knows that raw CPU speed is what makes them better. Heck I have a 3.2GHz Pentium 4, and now all we have is 2GHz dual core cpus. Sheesh, we aren't getting anywhere like this.
OK, first of all, a dual-core 2GHz CPU is essentially 2 2GHz CPUs on one chip, for a total of 4GHz of speed, plus some marginal gains due to not having to swap out the context quite as much when multitasking. Definitely superior to a single-core 3.2GHz CPU.
Now that dual-core 3GHz CPUs are common in laptops and the latest generation of CPUs is quad-core at over 2GHz, and in virtually the same price range as this laptop, a $500 system with a dual-core 1.3 GHz CPU is a total joke. As long as all you're running is Word and a browser you can get away with it, I guess, but I wouldn't think of using it as a primary PC.
Stranger2000 said: Paperbag said: Stranger2000 said: 1.3GHz processor laptops? Did I time travel back to 2001?
Seriously, I bought my 2GHz laptop like six years ago. Are these for collectors, or people looking for a slower, more leisurely pace of life?
Yea, everyone knows that raw CPU speed is what makes them better. Heck I have a 3.2GHz Pentium 4, and now all we have is 2GHz dual core cpus. Sheesh, we aren't getting anywhere like this.
OK, first of all, a dual-core 2GHz CPU is essentially 2 2GHz CPUs on one chip, for a total of 4GHz of speed, plus some marginal gains due to not having to swap out the context quite as much when multitasking. Definitely superior to a single-core 3.2GHz CPU.
Now that dual-core 3GHz CPUs are common in laptops and the latest generation of CPUs is quad-core at over 2GHz, and in virtually the same price range as this laptop, a $500 system with a dual-core 1.3 GHz CPU is a total joke. As long as all you're running is Word and a browser you can get away with it, I guess, but I wouldn't think of using it as a primary PC.
You have quite a bit to learn. I promise you the 1.3GHz CPU in this laptop is on par if not better than your six year old 2GHz chip. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MHz_myth
Edit: And no, a dual-core 2GHz cpu is not 4GHz. It's two 2GHz cpus that work together in parallel.
Can anyone point me to a good site or document comparing processors? I'm trying to buy a new notebook and between celeron, pentium dual core, i3/i5/i7, and AMD chips (Turion, etc) can't figure out what's comparable versus what's truly better or worse. I tried google and lots of confusing data. Thanks
CheapInNYC said: Can anyone point me to a good site or document comparing processors? I'm trying to buy a new notebook and between celeron, pentium dual core, i3/i5/i7, and AMD chips (Turion, etc) can't figure out what's comparable versus what's truly better or worse. I tried google and lots of confusing data. Thanks
Check major review sites for starters. These links are for desktop cpus, but can be translated for the most part into their mobile counter parts. Core i3, Core i5 reviews.
Overly simplified based on your listing above (I only know Intel side): Celeron < Pentium Dual-core < i3 < i5 < i7 Laptops are a bit more complex in their CPU offerings, so I can't comment exactly where the CPU in this laptop stands, but I'd say its much better than an Intel Atom found in netbooks based on comments i've read in these forums.
edit: you might check http://www.notebookreview.com/
Paperbag said: You have quite a bit to learn. I promise you the 1.3GHz CPU in this laptop is on par if not better than your six year old 2GHz chip. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MHz_myth Edit: And no, a dual-core 2GHz cpu is not 4GHz. It's two 2GHz cpus that work together in parallel.
Thank you for that edit, Captain Obvious.
It doesn't matter how my six-year-old CPU compares to this one. It's an antique in computer years. Let's compare apples to apples -- namely, what you can get NOW for that money. The SU4100 in this $500 laptop has a PassMark score of 978. The low-end Core i3M at 2.27 GHz has a PassMark score of 2183. Even the previous-generation Core 2 Duo at 3 GHz (E6850) is twice as fast as the SU4100. Here's the link: SU4100 benchmark
Hey, you were the one claiming that "a dual-core 2GHz CPU is essentially 2 2GHz CPUs on one chip, for a total of 4GHz of speed" somehow. By your logic, if it doesn't have the top of the line CPU 100GHz in it, it's not worth the money and no one should buy it. Also, you were the one comparing your six year old CPU to this one. Claiming that because it was 2Ghz it was somehow better than this 1.3GHz that we are going back in time as you said.
It also appears that you are missing the point of this CPU, and that not everyone wants a CPU that gets 1hr battery life. You point was to laugh that this CPU was only 1.3GHz and somehow this made it inferior. Don't go changing your stance now.
Stranger2000 said: 1.3GHz processor laptops? Did I time travel back to 2001?
Seriously, I bought my 2GHz laptop like six years ago. Are these for collectors, or people looking for a slower, more leisurely pace of life?
lol priceless.
jwdeal
New Member
posted: Feb. 23, 2010 @ 9:20a
Much of this assessment depends on your budget. With some searching you can find a Core i5 laptop with 4GB DDR3 and 15.6 LED widescreen for $600 (Costco currently has an Acer on promo) -- not much more than some deals for Core 2 Duo systems. The Core i3 & i5 CPUs add performance (both raw performance and perhaps mild improvement in battery life) vs the prior Core 2 Duo based platforms.
The move to Core i3 & i5 adds Intel's "nehalem" microarchitecture and a CPU built on their latest 32nm process (the graphics chip packaged with many of these processors is built at 45nm but is still a nice improvement over the prior graphics platform with core 2 duos). Consider that Intel is first to produce CPUs at 32nm and will do so for the next 2 years (before moving to 22nm next) -- personally I am a fan of "futureproofing" a PC purchase if it does not wreck your budget, especially when buying during a platform transition as we are in now .
Bottom line, buy a Core i5 if it meets your budget requirements !
Stranger2000 said: It doesn't matter how my six-year-old CPU compares to this one. It's an antique in computer years. Let's compare apples to apples -- namely, what you can get NOW for that money. The SU4100 in this $500 laptop has a PassMark score of 978. The low-end Core i3M at 2.27 GHz has a PassMark score of 2183. Even the previous-generation Core 2 Duo at 3 GHz (E6850) is twice as fast as the SU4100. Here's the link: SU4100 benchmark
I believe the main feature of SU line is power consumption. A lot of manufacturers are using those processors in ultra-portable (11-13") laptops with weight <4Lbs and 8-12 hours of battery life. Even single core SU3500 produces the good performance for day-by-day tasks. There are quite a few people who trade extra performance they don't need/notice for the travel weight and battery life.
Having this CPU in 5.6Lbs 15" laptop is questionable for me, but even this configuration has 6 hours of the battery life based on the specs.
dwkor said: I believe the main feature of SU line is power consumption. A lot of manufacturers are using those processors in ultra-portable (11-13") laptops with weight <4Lbs and 8-12 hours of battery life. Even single core SU3500 produces the good performance for day-by-day tasks. There are quite a few people who trade extra performance they don't need/notice for the travel weight and battery life.
Having this CPU in 5.6Lbs 15" laptop is questionable for me, but even this configuration has 6 hours of the battery life based on the specs.
That's my assessment too -- fine for a netbook-type device, not so much for one's primary PC.
Newegg is selling the 3GB Model in black right now for $549.99 w/ free shipping. By the time I include tax on the Lenovo deal, Newegg and Lenovo are nearly a wash. So essentially I am getting an extra gig of memory for free, the OS change (32bit vs 64bit), and it looks like crap (literally).
Considering Acer\Gateway\etc are selling similar laptops right now for $100-$150 less, I will pass on this deal.
CheapInNYC said: Can anyone point me to a good site or document comparing processors? I'm trying to buy a new notebook and between celeron, pentium dual core, i3/i5/i7, and AMD chips (Turion, etc) can't figure out what's comparable versus what's truly better or worse. I tried google and lots of confusing data. Thanks
2010 Ultimate Shoppers’ Guide to Laptop Processors
i am not sure about which one is gud and which is not..so if some one can plzz tell me wether dis is a gud deal or should i wait for some other laptop deals to come out???? is dis a gud laptop for dis rate?????
Thanks OP, ordered 1, used to order from Dell but fed up with their service.
blaander
Member
posted: Feb. 23, 2010 @ 10:05p
here's an easy-to-read comparison of processors. I don't think their test suite is as extensive as some, but you can't fault them for not having enough processors: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php
jay89 said: i am not sure about which one is gud and which is not..so if some one can plzz tell me wether dis is a gud deal or should i wait for some other laptop deals to come out???? is dis a gud laptop for dis rate?????
It's "this", not "dis".
It's "please", not "plzz".
It's "whether", not "wether".
It's "good", not "gud".
Call me a Grammar Nazi, but your post was annoying as hell to read.
And IMO this is just an average deal, nothing special.
LeonProfessional said: You claim that you compare apples to apples, specifically what you can get NOW, then compare an older desktop CPU to newer laptop CPUs, then link to an article that doesn't even list the CPUs you're referring to (neither the E6850 NOR the Core i3M)? Really???
Oy vey.. Google "passmark e6850", click link, note down score, repeat with i3m or any other processor of choice. Presto. Better yet -- click the "select a page" listbox just above the graph, and pick a chart with just about any processor made in the last decade.
Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.
Members of our community may attach files to a post in accordance with the User Agreement. FatWallet is not responsible for the content, accuracy, completeness or validity of any information contained in any attached file. Files have *not* been scanned for viruses. Be especially wary of Excel files which may contain malicious content.
Click to copy code and go to .