T9600 vs T9900

I've got a T9600 in my Dell SXPS 16 and was wondering if I bought a T9900 down the road (it's the most my laptop can upgrade) if it would make this computer a little snappier and basically extend it's life to last longer without needing replacement.

 

2.8GHz -> 3.06GHz; you probably would not notice the difference.

In my opinion, you would be better off purchasing a SSD instead, when the prices come around.

 

I doubt at this time the price would make it a worthy upgrade. The T9600 sells for 550 dollars on new egg and I don't know if the T9900 will be mas retail or not just spotted one on ebay for 450. If the price comes down you might find one cheap used later on or something.

With decent ram the T9600 should overclock upwards of 3.2 Ghz I will tell you soon, as I'm gonna drop one in my laptop in about a week.

 

I recently upgraded from a T9600 to a X9100 (exactly the same as T9900 but with higher TDP). I found there was a little performance bump, especially in CPU intensive tasks such as working with photoshop, but if you're going to be using it for basic apps, it might not be worth your while to upgrade your CPU just yet.

 

do t9600 and t9900 fit on macs? just curious
and are u using socket P ?

 

AFAIK, the current mac notebooks use BGA package cpu's which are soldered to the motherboard, not socketed and hence cannot be upgraded.

 

If you do upgrade, i would highly suggest buying from ebay. Any other place (like newegg) will sell it for much, much higher...

 

I recently made the same upgrade as David as well, and it does make a small, but noticeable, difference. I sold my T9600 to offset the cost, and ended up paying a total of $30 for the X9100 (es) upgrade. If you'll spend anything more than $75 on the upgrade, it's not worth it.

 

In my case I would save the money .

YAY 300th post!.

 

I replaced P8400 with T9800 and
Sold P8400 so T9800 cost me 140 pounds
Its better performance ..
I still can sell T9800 for more and buy T9900 ..

 

anyone think it'd be worth upgrading a T9550 (2.66) to the T9900 (3.06)?

I mostly work with photoshop, 3d design, and the occasional bleeding-edge game.

enough difference to make it worth the investment? or not until the prices drop?

 

@ajreynol I would wait a few months but I guess that you would see a decent difference in speed.

 

Will do. thanks!

well, another question: I know the prices will drop, but...I'm guessing I could sell the T9550 for ~$200, making the total T9900 investment right now around $210.

that's if I sold the T9550 today and bought the T9900 today.

a few months down the road, do you think that selling the T9550 and buying the T9900 will be less than that new $200 spent? Or will the T9550 lose more relative value? I've read people saying that they expect this to be Intel's last C2D processor and might not see a heavy number of them made. That might keep the price relatively high, no?

 

Typically, high end processors do not get cheaper, in fact they tend to be just as expensive if not more. Check out older processors such as T9500 or T7700/T7800 on eBay. 400MHz (~15%) is a pretty decent increase, though you probably won't notice any difference in gaming.

 

gotcha.

so probably better to bite soon if I'm going to bite.

also, is it not 400MHz x 2 worth of performance increase? or is that not how the addition works?

 

Yes, technically both cores are faster by 400MHz but because each core is 15% faster, doesn't linearly translate to 30% better overall. You can check out benchmarks of programs that take advantage of multicores and see how CPUs scale up.

 

OK...I too have an SXPS 16 and I have been looking around at potential upgrades and was wondering how the OP knew the system was limited to a T9900? I have been trying to find a website that had such upgrade info but nothing is all that clear to me. I was just going to go with the default max Dell offers but wondering if there is a better way of determining what is possible.

 

hate to ask, but...you wouldn't happen to know where I could find such benchmarks?

 

Because of power requirements, the T9900 is the fastest/best CPU the SXPS 1640 will take. It's 35watts like the T9800 (2.93ghz). The X9100 and Q9100 are 45watts, and they also create more heat.

 

So is the SXPS limited on how much power it can supply or how much heat it can dissapate?

 

For scaling, search around for Wprime results. For example T7200 @ 2GHz ~ 42.5s while T7600 (same generation) @ 2.33GHz ~ 38.3s, the clock difference is +16.5% which means it should take (inversely related) the T7600 86% of the time it takes a T7200 to calculate the 32M digits. 86% of 42.5s is 36.5s, whereas in reality the difference is only 90% (38.3s) of the time, which translates into +11% difference in performance. So as you can see even though each core is 16.5% faster, both cores don't get the 2x 16.5% difference.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=123570

Both. If the PSU is too low, you will get downclocking due to lack of power, similarly if the heat isn't dissipated, it will downclock due to overheating.

 

I've heard of someone that put a QX9300 (45w TDP) successfully into their SXPS16. You shouldn't have any problems with a 35w processor (Txxxx), or even the X9100.

 

Who installed a QX9300 in their SXPS 16? Got a link, screenshot or anything? I'm curious about how easy it was or if they needed any mods.

 

anyone interested in the T9800? It's got hell of a good price right now on ebay + 8% cash back. I got mine

X9100 @ $320, T9800 @ $340

http://shop.ebay.com/merchant/deals.unlimited

 

Don't threadjack/spam. If anything post in the deals section.

 

Hi I have T9800ES i bought it for bit less to compare what u wrote

 

yea, but this is the OEM which you can easily sell for the same amount if not more.

 

Nintendogs, I believe. I PMed him at one point when I was trying to find out if my Latitude could stand up to a 45W TDP. He had it on his sig and he confirmed it via PM. Think he encountered a few minor problems, PM him for more info.

 

I'm still interested in how much difference there is between the T9600 and T9900. Is it very much?

 

if you want to see benchmarks look here :T9600 is on 11th place and T9900 is on 6th place (comparing with desktop's cpus)
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html

 

You won't notice any benefit unless you currently have tasks that require stressing your CPU to 100% utilization. If so then the almost 10% speed difference will have a slight effect.

 

I'll put in my .02 and say that upgrading my P8600 to an X9000 last year made a huge difference in CPU-hungry games such as Crysis and anything using the Unreal3 engine (especially the latter).

I've got twin 8800GTX's in SLI, both OC'ed to the limit - and they were definitely being bottlenecked by the slow(er)CPU.

To get the best performance, you want all the subsystems balanced. That's why my latest upgrade was an Intel X25-M SSD. Now the notebook feels as if there's no bottleneck...anywhere.

Now what I'd love to know is why my M1730 feels snappier than my Tri-SLI GTX280 desktop with a 4.5GHz E8600? Maybe Win7 really IS that much better than Vista64.

 

could anyone advice as to whether I should go for the T9600 or T9900 on the Lenovo W500 i'm about to purchase. I'll be using the laptop for lots of 3D, Autocad, renderings, Adobe photoshop, video, animations etc.

the intel T9600 processor for the Lenovo is about $250 cheaper than the T9900. Do you think there will be much noticeable difference between a 2.8ghz and a 3.06ghz processor for the work I do? Should I go for the slower 2.8ghz one? Will it meet my needs? Money is tight as I'm a student. I'm sure I could upgrade to the 3.06ghz processor in a year for much less.

thoughts?

 

If you can justify ~9.3% difference in speed with $250, then I'd say by all means go ahead.

 

haha I don't know how much 9.3% is or if I'll even notice the difference in say tasks like rendering. what do you think? what would you do if you were in my shoes?

 

From what I'm reading, you are trying to get the best performance while trying to pinch pennies. I'd say stick with the T9600. 2.8GHz is plenty of speed for your pro apps.

 

Put it this way - if it took 60 minutes to render something with the T9600, it would take about 54 minutes to do the same thing with the T9900. Not much of a difference.

 

thnx for the simple explanation. guess i'm going with a T9600 then

 

You think that in a year or two, the price of the T9600 or T9800 will come down?

 

No. 10char

 

I hear you guys upgrade from T9600 (TDP 35W) to X9100 (TDP 44W).
How do your laptops cope with the heat? I am thinking of upgrading my p7450 to a q9100 but iam afraid my laptop will burst into flames.

 

I seriously doubt your machine even supports a Core 2 Quad processor.

Upgrade to a fast dual core.

 

It does support the q9100(same socket,compatible chipset with the right I/O Hub,same man.technology,and with the same fbs i wont even need a bios update) but the tdp is almost double. I guess I am going for a T9900.

 

yes that is ur option... i was thinking just like u earlier last year and i found out it is not possible... anyways , u can't OC X9100 as PLL is locked so T9900 , which has same stock speed and is cooler is ur best option....