T9400, P9600, or T9600 what is best value?

So I'm deciding between three processors, and I can't conclude on which one to get. All are ES.. which is fine I suppose it they all have the latest stepping (which the ones I'm looking at do). Here is what I'm choosing from:

T9400 2.53 GHz 35W... $148.88

The price for this is verry cheap. Of course it's not nearly the fastest processor, nor does it have the 10W lower thermal profile that the P9600 has. From what I read this idles around 25-30?? (correction please if I'm wrong)

P9600 2.66 GHz 25W... $220.00

Slightly more powerful than the T9400 but idles around 18 degrees! from what I heard. Another thing I wonder about.. this processor has the revision E0 while the others have C0 (off by 2 letters), does this mean anything?.. Could this processor could potentially be better than the T9600 even though it's faster because all because of the later revision number? And not to mention battery life should be better with this.

T9600 2.8 GHz 35W... $233.88

The fastest of the three, but costs the most and I've read this idles the highest out of the three. Plus the revision number is C0 (if that means anything)

What does everybody think I should go with?.. I could easily use anything that is very powerful quite easily but at the same time I would like to have something that runs as cool as possible. Of course, I should just be buying the T9400 because I REALLY shouldn't be spending the money (I'm a college student!)

Would a 270 MHz increase for $85 increase really show much of a difference?
Would a 130 MHz increase, 10W decrease, battery increase, + newer revision number for $71.12 increase be worth it?

Right now I'm not even thinking about the T9600, but I threw it in there in case people may think it is the best deal. I'm leaning towards the P9600 at the moment.. any response is completely welcomed. Thanks.

 

It seems that you don't count SP9400 which is 25W and $178.88 at seller you looked for T9400. (In fact I don't count too for a 10W difference)

If I were you, I would pick T9400 especially if speed and battery life is not my primary concern. And SP9400 if I concern battery life.

Although I don't know if accurate but Notebookcheck.net CPU Benchmark may give an idea, but as I used last an AMD ML-37 (2.0GHz, single core) I don't expect much difference between them on my own.

C0 stepping seems to be quite stable (I didn't hear anyone complaining yet) but E0 or later is also called as QS and most times considered to be OEM as I saw.

 

You should go for the P/SP Series. It would really help you keep your laptop cool

 

I'd say only go P series if you are having heat issues already if not go for the t9600 best performance and under load for a few hours of Warhammer online it stays in the 50'sC...

 

In my opinion, the CPU speed is not a concern, a 2.0 Ghz is fast enough. I think the operational temperature and battery life is more important, and therefore suggest the P9600 for the lower tdp.

 

I suppose if barttery life is a concern and if your basicly just using it for college go with the P series and like pikachu said 2.0ghz really is plenty fast for internet/email/office type stuff. in fact i have a p8400 jsut laying around...

 

The battery life differences between the T and P series is not all that much. Both processors use basically the same power requirements at idle. The P series will be more power efficient, but its not like the difference is an hour.

I would get the T9400. 2.53GHz dual core is more than enough for most people.
If you just game, the graphics card in your system is going to bottleneck all of those processors.
If you do CAD, video editing, you may want to get the higher clocked processor because it will cut down rendering times more

K-TRON

 

A CPU cannot idle at 18*C, esp a Penryn. Heck, even an Atom doesn't idle at 18*C
Most Intel CPUs are not properly calibrated (due to mass production), so the DTS gives out wrong thermal readings -.-

If you run loads of intensive tasks, and the CPU is usually loaded to 90-100% most of the times, then the P9600 will be better as it has a lower TDP which can be reduced further by undervolting. Otherwise the T9400 will be fine, which can also be undervolted to reduce the TDP.

Low TDP, undervolting, etc affects idle temps very less. At idle, the T and P series have almost the same TDP. Its only at full load that a P-series CPU is useful 'cause of low load temp and less fan noise. Battery life won't be affected much, but it is hard to say since I've not seen a proper comparison between a T and P-series CPU for battery life.

The SP-series CPU have a smaller (BGA) package than the P and T-series. You might find modded versions that come with PGA sockets but it'l be hard to say if it would sit well in the socket and under the heatsink.

 

Thanks everybody. Yeah I figured that the P9600 would be the best for me. I think getting the processor that stays the coolest would be the best for me. I'm one of the rare types that actually puts their laptop on their lap occasionally.. Plus I don't want my new processor to be anywhere as hot as the one I have now gets. Not that it's bad.. but I would benefit better with it the way I use my computer. Plus, if I ever decide to overclock my GPU my computer will not produce as much heat as with a 35W processor I believe.

Anyway, after I decided on this I went to go purchase it and it was gone. I'm not sure.. maybe I'll just go with the T9400 since it's significantly cheaper, but still.. I don't know if it's really what I want.

 

Never enough speed! $85 is cheap enough to upgrade to the T9600, imo. But only if you'll actually tax your computer enough to see a difference... (game, encode audio/video, professional software)

 

i would have said the P9600 but that sucks that its gone.

 

Cephasara, where did you get those prices for the processors. I am looking to upgrade and I can't find any prices even close.

 

They're engineering samples, not retail or OEM ones. eBay has some ES for sale...

 

If the notebook can over clock the P9600 looks like the best choice.

P9600 in general is better because of the lower power requirements.

 

Thanks everybody for the opinions.. I believe I see better where I stand now.

Still I'm not sure what to get. I think I narrowed it down to a 25W processor though. I don't think 200-300MHz will make a huge difference even though it sure does price wise, anyway I'm getting a MS-1651 therefore I can overclock whatever it is.

I feel like spending more than $220 for any ES processor around 2.6GHz is not worth it. But correct me if I'm wrong. I may just go for an ES P9500 for $214.88. Unless any P9600s pop up soon for cheap.

One more thing, are there any differences between the two steppings C0 and E0? I know E0 is reserved for the montevina refresh processors.. but would a P9600 (with E0) be better than a P9500 (with C0) in other ways than just clock speed? Also, now that the refresh processors are out would the initial release processors like the P9500 be seen with a E0 stepping too?

Yep, all engineering samples for better or for worse. Except I found a P9500 non-ES for ~$190 but it has already been on ebay once. I don't really trust the condition of a very fragile computer component being shuffled around, plus the seller does not offer any return on it.

 

i know computers have diffrent thermal designs but here's mines. the t9400(t9300 overclocked) runs hot. the p9500 i think is a revisied t9400. the t9600 is a overclocked t9500. so i would go with the p9500.

 

I wouldn't say it's that simple, I'm sure they had to rework a lot for the P series, but advancing the T series had to be more than just an overclock. My T9600 runs extremely cool, I think it's your crossfire 3870s that are keeping the whole notebook warm, and that makes sense...they are fullsize GPUs with maximum 110 TDW together.

 

and what do you guys say about t9800 in laptop ?

 

t9400 is A HOT chip for some reason. it idles in most notebooks over 40-42deg!!

in comparison my t9800 idles at only 31deg in the same notebook!

out of the three in the title the t9600 is for sure the best chip of them, the p9600 imo is a bit overpriced right now and imo forget the t9400 unless you are doing a budget build they just run to hot (btw i have 4 t9400's here and have had another 3-5 in the past in my hands and all ran about the same temps) heck even the qx9300 runs cooler lol

 

Get T9400 and undervolt it, by far the best value. I can almost guarantee you can run it at under 25 watts after undervolting. 1.0 volts should be easily possible. .975 volts likely.

 

Okay. Well I went with a P9600 but for some reason it was called a E8135. It's not an ES, and it has all the same specs as a P9600 but somehow has C0 stepping instead of E0, even though the final version of a P9600 is E0. It was only $202.60 (with 8% live cashback). I hope it lives up to a P9600.

At any rate has anybody ever heard of one of these? Or an E8435? I can't find any information on them online anywhere. Well I hope it just functions like a P9600. My guess is maybe it's a product released from Intel that wasn't meant for retail.

 

its a imac chip. it is a older than montevina chip and was a santa rosa refresh made for apple. they have a higher tdp from the info im finding than their p9600 counterparts.

 

see here: http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=359444

 

Hmm, well according to one of those articles on that post it's still 25W TDP at least. Makes sense why it has the stepping C0 then. Oh well.. I guess it's still alright. I really wanted something with E0 instead, just because it's newer. As long as it works in my laptop I guess that's all that will matter.

What are you saying about it being an "newer" santa rosa refresh chip? It has the 1066MHz bus rate and it has a 25W TDP still. Besides, isn't that what Montevina basically is? Would there be any major differences between these two processors, P9600 & E8135?

Will this work in my laptop, a MS-1651?

 

with the 1651 it may or may not. these came out before montevina and were not dubbed "montevina" yet they were called a santa rosa refresh i called intel today to ask about them. essentially they are the same there are a few minor differences regarding the vid but not much else. the thing he told me though is some notebooks may not recognize the microcode for these and they may or may not boot with them.

 

E8135 (2.66ghz/6mb/1066)/E8435(3.06ghz/6mb/1066) are iMac processors, I just noticed a 8135 on ebay today myself. I'm wondering what the chances are that a standard PC laptop would recognize one would be. I suspect it's a CPU intel is making only for Apple products.

 

Well I bought one. I'll find out later next week if it works or not. I hope the seller lets me exchange it if it does not work, since I see he sells other processors.

What is vid? So I'm assuming there may be some other parts of the processor that are more based on the santa rosa refresh than montevina.

Do you happen to know the difference between montevina and montevina refresh chips?

 

Cephasara,

Just wondering if you ever got the E8135 to work on you msi 1651?

 

It was brought up before... higher TDP doesn't translate into high power consumption or heat. Just stick with the cheapest model you're comparing, since the differences in performance and battery life are negligible compared to the cost you're incurring when going with a more expensive model.