2.2 Processor OR 7,200 RPM HD

So I'm going to order a 1720, but I have to decide between a 2.2ghz processor or the 7200 rpm hd. Which one would benefit overall performance in graphical design, word processing, and light gaming?

 

7200 rpm is the better option i would say, as the bottle neck of speed lag lies in hard drive.

 

Good to know, thanks.

 

Which CPU do you have now?

 

I would go with the 7200. The increase from 2.0 to 2.2 Ghz is minimal, but the increase from 5400 to 7200 it quite significant. Besides, in most systems the hard drive is the bottleneck. I got the 2.0Ghz and 7200 hard drive in the computer I just ordered several days ago.

 

This is what I was going with, but I can upgrade the HD or the processor.

Dell 1720

* Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T7250 (2.0GHz/800Mhz FSB/2MB cache)
* Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition
* 2GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 at 667MHz
* High Resolution, glossy widescreen 17.0 inch display (1920 x 1200)
* 256MB NVIDIA® GeForce® 8600M GT
* Size: 120GB SATA Hard Drive (5400RPM)
* Integrated 10/100 Network Card and Modem
* CD / DVD writer (DVD+/-RW Drive)
* High Definition Audio 2.0
* Intel® 3945 802.11a/g Mini-card

 

Yup upgrade the hdd then ....what size are you upgrading to???

 

Well it's going to be a upgrade from the 120gb 5400, to the 160gb 7200, $150, will it be worth it?

 

Well you can get a 160GB 7200rpm hitachi travelstar from newegg for $169

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822145180

Why not do that and use the original hdd as external storage(buy a external enclosure also)?

 

When talking about these bottlenecks, I am starting to worry how big an effect my HD will have on my system? Will it be significant?
(If yes, wouldn't you agree with me that it's a little odd that DELL even offers 5400rpm HD's on their gaming laptops?)

 

I was just thinking about that, I get a free HD in a sense, and save my money if I want to upgrade the HD down the road.

 

No need to worry, 5400 is not bad, especially when its 250GB like yours, higher capacity->better performance because the data are packed closer together.


EDIT:

Yup! exactly

 

Yes, it will have a large impact on game loading/general windows usage speeds. However, it does not affect framerate in games, so if you don't mind longer loading times and a slower all around computer, you can go with the faster processor for a slightly higher framerate in games. Still, the 7200 rpm is almost a must for windows vista.

 

What?????? a must.
You are dearly misinformed.
2GB maybe a must for Vista but Vista runs fine on even 4,200 RPM drives it makes little difference yes more then a 200 MHz CPU increase but, still its not a large impact on gaming or anyother task your doing.

 

Yeah I'd have a hard time believing that so many 5400rpm HD's would be in production if Vista wouldn't work with it.

 

Yee the thing with HDDS is capsity Vs. speed 5400RPM drives are cheaper & you get more capacity & vice-versa with 7200RPM drives.

 

Ok, it's not a must but there is a large performance difference. I've used several laptops with Vista and 5400 RPM drives, and they were nothing compared to ones with 7200's or RAID 0 5400s. Albiet, most of the laptops I've used with 5400s have slower processors then the 7200's, but the startup/application launch times are very different, even with similar amounts of memory. However, I did forget to add that a high density 5400 will help a lot (Case in point: My friend replaced a 60GB 7200rpm with a 160GB 5400 without a significant performance decrease). In the end, it may not make as big of a difference as I said in my earlier post, but it will still be a much larger speed increase then going from a 2.0 to 2.2. Remember, clock speeds are not everything: FSB speed, L2 Cache size, #of cores, and other factors make the difference in speed even smaller.

 

If your needs are simple, the processor is nice to have now, because you can always upgrade the drive later, if you think your budget may allow for that at some point. Then again, 2 gHz is quite fast, so who needs 2.2?

However, as someone who has insisted on buying 7200RPM in my laptop for 5 years, I will say that I would pick the 7200 RPM drive over the additional 200mHz, if I had to pick between the two.

 

"graphical design, word processing, and light gaming"... maybe 7200 HD won't make huge difference. Besides, I think Dell over prices their HD. Why not buy after market 7200 HD and used the 5400 comes with it for external HD. It's very simple to change HD. However, it's hard to change processor. I think I would go with processor and get 7200 HD down and road.

 

Yes, now that I think about it that seems like a better idea. Now I wish I had gotten the basic hard drive and ordered a 7200 off of newegg, enclosures are cheap and I've been looking for an external drive

 

Dont forget...this is a laptop. And if your spending alot of time w/o a power source 5400rpm is the way to go. Hard drive speed benefits loading times like bootup and application loading.

 

I didn't tell my story fully in my previous post. Long story short... I got my 1420 replacement with wrong CPU and HD (Dell's mistake):

T7100 (old) --> T7500 (replacement)
7200 HD (old) --> 5400 HD (replacement)

Dell refunded me $125 for the mistake even though I got the T7500. Personally, I did video editing, light gaming, and word processing on my laptop. I do not notice significant differences. That's the reason I demanded refund instead of replacement.