• 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.

T4200 VS T6400 core 2 duo

as far as i can tell, the only difference is the 4200 has 1mb of l2, and the 6400 has 2mb. theyre both 45nm penryn @ 2ghz with 800mhz fsb

not worth the price premium, imo, if thats really all there is to them
 
I noticed the same thing, that they are both 45nm penryns at the same clock with only 1mb of cache being the difference. What I didn't know was if there was some other architecture, or whether that 1mb of cache really makes a difference? I couldn't find any benches to compare the two, only one that has a few of the T5000 procs on it, which I'm not sure how those compare to the T4000 series, but the 6000 definitely looks better than the 5s, so I assumed the 4s to be not as good as the 5s? Being so I thought the 6 series might actually be worth it, but I can't find anything concrete, it's all speculation...

(btw the bench that i found was for passmark and had a long list of cpus on it, but not any T4000 series procs.)
 
dont use the model numbers to assume anything. the difference is 1mb of cache, and thats it. if you want real details on what thats going to mean, you should get this moved to general hard or (preferably) the cpu forum

the more processor intensive the task, the more the amount of cache matters...as well as other hardware. i *expect* youd be better off to upgrade ram or something rather than the cpu, but im not a hardcore hardware guy. i still dont expect that the $50 is worth the upgrade.
 
there are way too many mobile chips from Intel. T2xxx, some T3xxx, this T4200?, T5xxx, T6xxx, T7xxx, T8xxx, T9xxx, P8xxx, P9xxx. It's getting crazy now. Forget the model numbers, you really do need to look at specs. I feel sorry for Joe Average who just takes the highest model number regardless of cost. Most times there is very little difference bet these chips.
 
Well, I think that I was trying to over think it sauron, like there might be some hidden aspect but who tf knows, lol. yeah, 1mb of cache is the only difference that really stands out, everything else is the same. I think i have a few more questions now though as I am looking at a Vostro with a 5670 proc in it, pardon my lack of knowledge, but how do I move a thread to the cpu section? or do i just repost it there?
 
only a mod can move threads. only other option is to start another one in the other forum, but then theres a rule against double posting topics..
i dont even know if theres a mod here for video cards. i certainly have never seen him.

 
Well crap, i guess I'll just keep it here then... Anyway, I wish there was something I could find to really explain all theses damn intel chips, as taisingera pointed out it's getting rather ridiculous, and there are a number of them with very similar clock speeds, bus speeds and cache, so what the hell is the difference? Would be nice if someone could take the time to put something definitive together with all these new chips included...
 
OOOOOhhhh, this is at least a little bit helpful

http://ark.intel.com/ProductCo...on.aspx?familyID=26548


The T4200 I have no idea as that one doesn't even come up. Apparently it compares well to the T3200 though as far as I can tell, but it is a 45nm while the T3200 is a 65, and the FSB is 800 on the T4200.

Basically after a lot of digging it looks like aside from the obvious differences of cache size, die size, fsb, and core clock, the main difference I can see is that the cores are sort of intermingled, some are merom, some are penryn, which remains a bit confusing, however one thing that does seem to be a solid trend is that anything T7000 series and up has virtualization support, while anything T6000 series and below does not.
 
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
You can check this list to get a better idea of specs and performance:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/M...chmarklist.2436.0.html
Click to expand...

Nice list, it's really helpful for specs, lots of the new procs though unfortunately it has no bench info on, nor any of the specifics on what is and is not in the core architecture, such as the virtualization support, a really good list though still, I forgot about notebookcheck, i referenced their chart last time I was trying to figure out mobile video about a year ago 🙂
 
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
The t4200 is a Pentium Dual Core chip thus is a different architecture than the C2D. I think we can safely say the t6400 will be woth the $50.
Click to expand...

uh no.


basically the T4200 is justa cut down T6400 (which is a cut down version of some 3mb chip in the 8000 series).


i doubt you will notice much and $50 could be a sizeable amount of money for the total price of a laptop.

if you are using this laptop for typical laptop things you probably will not even notice. its like buying an e5200 instead of an e7200.
 
Originally posted by: hans007
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
The t4200 is a Pentium Dual Core chip thus is a different architecture than the C2D. I think we can safely say the t6400 will be woth the $50.
Click to expand...

uh no.


basically the T4200 is justa cut down T6400 (which is a cut down version of some 3mb chip in the 8000 series).
Click to expand...

You're dead wrong. The T4200 is a merom chip (65nm). The T6400 is Penryn (45nm). I'm sure there are a few other differences to note as well.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/M...chmarklist.2436.0.html
 
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
The t4200 is a Pentium Dual Core chip thus is a different architecture than the C2D. I think we can safely say the t6400 will be woth the $50.
Click to expand...


... another victim of Intel PR.

A Pentium Dual Core Txxxx is a C2D with some L2 cache and virtualization disabled. Same architecture.

T6400 is not worth the $50 upgrade.
 
uh no.


basically the T4200 is justa cut down T6400 (which is a cut down version of some 3mb chip in the 8000 series).
Click to expand...

You're dead wrong. The T4200 is a merom chip (65nm). The T6400 is Penryn (45nm). I'm sure there are a few other differences to note as well.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/M...chmarklist.2436.0.html
Click to expand...

That link also says the T4200 runs at 2.1ghz... so I'll take the info with a grain of salt. I hope it is wrong about this chip being a merom... it'll be a great (cheaper) alternative to the T6400.
 
Originally posted by: Ecliptic
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
The t4200 is a Pentium Dual Core chip thus is a different architecture than the C2D. I think we can safely say the t6400 will be woth the $50.
Click to expand...


... another victim of Intel PR.

A Pentium Dual Core Txxxx is a C2D with some L2 cache and virtualization disabled. Same architecture.

T6400 is not worth the $50 upgrade.
Click to expand...

Care to offer up some proof? So you say my t2060 is a Core2Duo not a Pentium Dual Core
 
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
Originally posted by: Ecliptic
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
The t4200 is a Pentium Dual Core chip thus is a different architecture than the C2D. I think we can safely say the t6400 will be woth the $50.
Click to expand...


... another victim of Intel PR.

A Pentium Dual Core Txxxx is a C2D with some L2 cache and virtualization disabled. Same architecture.

T6400 is not worth the $50 upgrade.
Click to expand...

Care to offer up some proof? So you say my t2060 is a Core2Duo not a Pentium Dual Core
Click to expand...

Is the same core as C2D, intel just uses a different marketing name for the lower end chips with cutdown cache. eg E2*** series are exactly the same as E4*** series just with 1meg cache instead of 2 but one is names C2D and the other PD.

Pentium Dual core is a marketing term, same as Core 2 Duo.
 
Originally posted by: Ecliptic
uh no.


basically the T4200 is justa cut down T6400 (which is a cut down version of some 3mb chip in the 8000 series).
Click to expand...

You're dead wrong. The T4200 is a merom chip (65nm). The T6400 is Penryn (45nm). I'm sure there are a few other differences to note as well.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/M...chmarklist.2436.0.html
Click to expand...

That link also says the T4200 runs at 2.1ghz... so I'll take the info with a grain of salt. I hope it is wrong about this chip being a merom... it'll be a great (cheaper) alternative to the T6400.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's incorrect. I HAVE a T4200 - it runs @ 2ghz even. It's also a 45nm Penryn chip, not a Merom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top