• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Google skills are lacking... Any 4c/4t SB laptop chips?

The mobile Ivy Bridge chips are looking to be a greater improvement than on desktop. I think only the 35W dual cores are going to disappoint. The Ivy Bridge quad cores and 17W Ultrabook oriented SKUs seem to be a decent gain over Sandy Bridge.
 
If you are looking for a 2nd generation Intel® Core™ i7 processor that is a quad without hyper-threading you would have to get one of these processors and turn off hyper-threading in the Bios.

The mobile line is not as clear cut as the desktop processors as to which family a processor belongs to.
 
IntelEnthusiast said:
If you are looking for a 2nd generation Intel® Core™ i7 processor that is a quad without hyper-threading you would have to get one of these processors and turn off hyper-threading in the Bios.

The mobile line is not as clear cut as the desktop processors as to which family a processor belongs to.
Click to expand...

Good luck finding a laptop with an unlocked bios.
 
They don't exist, and never will. However, laptops with the i7-2670QM can be found relatively inexpensive and with it you get serious multi-threaded performance, very similar to the i5-2500(K).

For comparison in Cinebench 11.5 the 2670QM scores 5.20 points and the 2500(K) 5.40 points.
 
IntelEnthusiast said:
If you are looking for a 2nd generation Intel® Core™ i7 processor that is a quad without hyper-threading you would have to get one of these processors and turn off hyper-threading in the Bios.

The mobile line is not as clear cut as the desktop processors as to which family a processor belongs to.
Click to expand...

I'm looking to not pay for something I don't actually need :thumbsup:

If I didn't have to pay extra for HT, I'd take it :awe:


Really I just don't think my mindset is really going to jive well with current laptops.

My current laptop is an old $600 z14 that allows me to overclock both the cpu and gpu about 25% each.
 
Last edited:
BallaTheFeared said:
I'm looking to not pay for something I don't actually need :thumbsup:

If I didn't have to pay extra for HT, I'd take it :awe:


Really I just don't think my mindset is really going to jive well with current laptops.

My current laptop is an old $600 z14 that allows me to overclock both the cpu and gpu about 25% each.
Click to expand...

Most people that need a quad-core in a laptop is because they're looking for a desktop replacement and high multi-threaded performance.

As for overclocking, both the Core i5 and i7 do it. Even in one of the most stressful programs, IntelBurnTest, my laptop's 2.3GHz base CPU stays pegged at 2.7GHz for the entire duration. That's a 17% "overclock".

Maybe people should stop complaining. The amount of processing power you can get in a laptop today is ridiculous, and you can find deals for laptops that are less than $800 and have the i7-2630QM and -2670QM.
 
AFAIK the mobile i5s are only dual core whereas the i7s are quads.

I'm interested in an Ivy Bridge quad core laptop. I wouldn't buy a dual core.
 
BallaTheFeared said:
I'm looking to not pay for something I don't actually need :thumbsup:

If I didn't have to pay extra for HT, I'd take it :awe:
Click to expand...

All the 4C/4T Sandy Bridge chips are Hyperthreading disabled chips. You are still paying for the development cost. Actually you could almost say the feature is built in there by default. There's no way to avoid it.
 
Yes but it's a $100 premium on desktops 2500k vs 2600k for HT, which is a nominal 30~ percent gain in the few programs that can actually take advantage of it, none of them are programs I'd actually be using.

It just seems odd that they wouldn't address that market segment. Most of the games I play are cpu intensive, most of those are dual threaded. I'd want a quad without HT for the latter like BF3. However a 2.7GHz SB just isn't enough in many of the other titles, SC2, Skyrim, WoW, those are games I play often and would choke in several situations with a lower clocked SB. My i5-2500k is barely able to produce what I'd call acceptable frame rates at times, especially in crowded cities, or during heavy action with several players and/or custom maps in SC2.

I don't consider turbo an overclock, it's running as specified by the chip manufacturer - as advertised.

I was thinking about maybe going IB + Kepler but IB is going to be locked down just like SB, and Kepler is going to be just as goofy if the 680 is any proof of that.
 
BallaTheFeared said:
Yes but it's a $100 premium on desktops 2500k vs 2600k for HT, which is a nominal 30~ percent gain in the few programs that can actually take advantage of it, none of them are programs I'd actually be using.
Click to expand...

They could have made Hyperthreading enabled 2600K only $30 more than 2500K. They just don't do it because its an artificial segmentation. Plus you can get 2500K and just overclock it, and use $100 less.

However a 2.7GHz SB just isn't enough in many of the other titles, SC2, Skyrim, WoW, those are games I play often and would choke in several situations with a lower clocked SB. My i5-2500k is barely able to produce what I'd call acceptable frame rates at times, especially in crowded cities, or during heavy action with several players and/or custom maps in SC2.
Click to expand...
Wait, I'm confused. You want a mobile 4C/4T yet you say 2500K is too slow. The mobile chips aren't running at 2.7GHz because it has Hyperthreading if that's what you are saying, but because its working in a thermally limited environment.
 
Last edited:
IntelUser2000 said:
They could have made Hyperthreading enabled 2600K only $30 more than 2500K. They just don't do it because its an artificial segmentation. Plus you can get 2500K and just overclock it, and use $100 less.

Wait, I'm confused. You want a mobile 4C/4T yet you say 2500K is too slow. The mobile chips aren't running at 2.7GHz because it has Hyperthreading if that's what you are saying, but because its working in a thermally limited environment.
Click to expand...

Sure they could price it anywhere, point being a 4c/4t product should, and would be less.

No, my entire point revolved around Intel pricing chips with the same physical core count without HT less than those with HT. The i7's are $300+, and do not offer any sort of overclocking. You need to buy the $1000 i7 for an unlocked processor. The $225 i5, is a 2c/4t chip with a locked multiplier.

Which kind of brings us full circle, Intel killing fsb overclocking wasn't so awful with decently priced unlocked desktop chips. However on the mobile side it's simply awful as far as I can tell, the only chip with any overclocking potential is $1000.

As far as my i5-2500k goes, well I made a post about it on OCN.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1012690/...-you-need-answer-more-than-sandy-bridge/0_100

3.6GHz
3a1c6dae.jpg


5.3GHz
abb069eb.jpg


Right now my T6500 (2.1GHz Core2Duo) is unplayable in 25 man raids, there isn't enough umph in it. Even overclocked to 2.5GHz it's still sadly incapable of decent playback of smooth gameplay in large raids.

I haven't tested my i5-2500k at 2.8-3.5GHz in a 25 man, but perhaps I should because that would be the best way to actually gauge what kind of performance I should expect from a mobile SB laptop.
 
It's hard to comment about SKU differences. Technical advice is easier however. 🙂

I think you should wait for Ivy Bridge and get a quad core laptop then. Preliminary results show the 3720QM to be 15-20% faster than the predecessor, the 2760QM. That would put it in the range of 2500K in games, and better in multi-threaded applications, though you said you didn't care about the latter. 😛
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top