The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    Big difference between C2D 2.0Ghz and 2.2Ghz ?

    Discussion in 'Dell' started by Osires, Dec 15, 2007.

  1. Osires

    Osires Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    Ive ordered a Dell XPS 1530, im pretty satisfied with my config, just one thing that i im not sure off,

    Right know my config is

    2.0Ghz 2mb C2D
    2GB 667 Mhz DDR2-Ram
    160 7200RPM Hdd
    Wireless-N
    Nvidia Geforce 8600GT 256MB
    and all the usual options

    Am i gonna notice a big difference if i choose the 2.2Ghz cpu with 4mb cache? Is my framerates gonna up much in games like CS Source or is it like 2-5fps more were talking about?
     
    Osires, Dec 15, 2007
    #1
  2. Johnny T

    Johnny T Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    6,092
    Messages:
    12,975
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    481
    No it won't be too much of a difference... :)
     
    Johnny T, Dec 15, 2007
    #2
  3. A Led Rock

    A Led Rock Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    6
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    not a $75 difference lol
     
    A Led Rock, Dec 15, 2007
    #3
  4. Osires

    Osires Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    yeah thats the most important thing, im going to upgrade only if the performance is worth the extra money for it. But it isn't, right?
     
    Osires, Dec 15, 2007
    #4
  5. A Led Rock

    A Led Rock Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    6
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    i would say no
     
    A Led Rock, Dec 15, 2007
    #5
  6. FearTheTerp

    FearTheTerp Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    18
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    A little bit more than 2-5 fps. If you look at the difference between the desktop e6400(2MB 2.13) and e6600(4MB 2.4), it's about 10-12 frames. Cache has little to do with it though, the e6420 with 4mb cache performs about 4-5 frames faster than the 2mb version. The 8600GT is the bottleneck regardless, so I think your fine.
     
    FearTheTerp, Dec 15, 2007
    #6
  7. A Led Rock

    A Led Rock Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    6
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    exactly...ur GPU will bottleneck even the 1.5 ghz....so save ur money and go with the 2.0 ghz...(just like uncle led rock ;))
     
    A Led Rock, Dec 15, 2007
    #7
  8. DeusEx

    DeusEx Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    72
    Messages:
    513
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    NOT WORTH IT. keep the money man.... 200 mhz increasing FPS in games ? no way.
     
    DeusEx, Dec 15, 2007
    #8