Help me choose my hardware

Ok... For those of who not following my inconsequential gripes, my laptop recently died. I'm in the process of acquiring a new computer. Last week I bought a Asus U6SG laptop. A terrific machine but an awesome mistake. I has no XP drivers and, while this can be handled, installing XP breaks the warranty. I'm going to returning it tomorrow (Monday). Already talked them in.

I've spent today the whole afternoon around shopping malls looking for a replacement. Nothing useful. So I changed my strategy. I'm going to split my budget in two and buy tomorrow a desktop and order a laptop.

The laptop will be:
Lenovo Thinkpad T61 (customized)
15.4'' Widescreen
Intel C2D T9300 2.5GHz 800MHz 6MBL2
2 GB DDR2
100GB 7200rpm
SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop version 10

I will need to order this from UK. With a discount of 100 Euros, it will cost me around 800 Euros, 900 USD.

Now, for desktop I'm going to buy tomorrow I need your help in understanding the hardware involved. I have so much to choose from that I need a quick crash course in recent hardware. Ever since Pentium 4, I lost track of the developments.

So...

- What exactly is the different between Intel Core, Core 2 and Core 2 Duo?
- Looking at two Core 2 Duo, one the E8400 3Ghz and the other a E4500 2.2Ghz, what's the approximate ratio in loss of speed? How do they compare to a P4?
- What's the difference between Core 2 Duo T and E series?
- Are there any problems between SATA hard drives and XP?

Folks, help me decide.

1) The Core2 is the successor of the Core, adding SSSE3 (or even SSE4, not sure), 64-bit support, and a few other goodies. Since the Core, Intel attaches Uno, Duo or Quattro to the name to indicate the number of cores, so the Core 2 Duo has two cores.

2) Generally speaking, the Core 2 blows the P4 away. It has an overall much better architecture, with a reasonably sized pipeline. It has a very smart microcode implementation. It has a full-width SSE engine, which means that most SSE operations take half the cycles.

3) The Ts are the mobile variants, nowadays based on the Penryn core. The Es are the desktop Wolfdale core chips.

4) Not since SP2, I believe.

Hmm.. excellent info CornedBee. Will read more into it based on what you said. Thanks. (And thanks also for the earlier tip on Lenovos. Despite some limitations, I ended choosing one.)

Just one last question (or a repeat actually). I cannot rate Intel Core 2 processors because, well, I don't know much about them. Regarding question 2 how would you compare both processors?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CornedBee

1) The Core2 is the successor of the Core, adding SSSE3 (or even SSE4, not sure)

---

The 65nm C2Ds have SSE3, the new 45nm models have SSE4.

Mario:

One of my friends got an E8400 at stock speed, he manages a SuperPI in around 14 seconds. I have an E4600 and i can do it in 22 seconds.

Although this is a bad benchmark for multi-core processors, it should give an all round picture of how they perform relative to each other.

However, the E8400 is a high-end part, and imo you would only ever need such a CPU if you are playing new games. My E4600 is lightning fast for everything i throw at it. I can play 1080P x264 movies in VLC with around 32% usage on both cores, so there is plenty left for other stuff, i can convert a 700mb AVI video file in around 20 minutes (This took 3-4 hours on my old celly, i couldn't believe it when i first tried it on the E4600) and i can play Crysis with all settings turned to high @ 1152*864, with framerates never below 20, averaging about 40. (This is with an 8800GS 384MB)

The only difference between an E4600 and E4500 is a slightly higher multiplier, i think i would be hard pressed to tell the difference, and i can VERY much recommend it. It is simply a quantum leap compared to my old Celeron D 2,53, and it was so cheap aswell!

So in short, unless you want to play games in high resolution, stick with the E4500, imo atleast.

Edit:

I'm sure you won't regret the Thinkpad aswell, those things will outlast a small star, no matter what you do to it.

Excellent! Even more so because I'm not a gamer ;) Thanks a bunch for the info.

So, it's a done deal, the desktop will be this one:

INSYS (basically an assembler with some mean looking cases)
Intell C2D E4500 2.2 Ghz
3Gb DDR2
Geforce 7200 GS (512Mb)
250 GB SATA

That's 449 Euros (err... around 600 USD). This machine will run Windows XP exclusively (the laptop is the Linux one). I don't plan ever to use Vista. My successful transition to Linux started a few months ago, means this machine will too eventually host Linux when XP becomes a thing of the past.

So... in the end I get two machines for 1200 Euros and I still have 400 Euros left for spending however I please. How dumb was I when I bought that Asus? Don't answer please :)

Mario:

So you are buying it pre-assembled then? I think you should consider putting it together yourself. It took me around 2 hours, from when i got the parts with the mail, to when i could boot the PC and start installing XP. On top of that, i got some really high quality components and it cost me the same as a pre-assembled PC with much lower specs.

Other recommendations:
Antec P182
Gigabyte Mobo
Corsair RAM and PSU

Just to assure you: With XP and SP2/3 you will have no problems whatsoever with SATA drives. I have been using them for years and had no problems with them.
Aside from that, I would probably recommend a 3d-party HD, especially Travelstar because they offer excellent performance, better than standard HDs for laptops (which typically are 5400 rpm, as well). The Travelstars are 7200 rpm (but power-wise, they're 5400 rpm).
I was blown away by the time I switched out the HD from my laptop for the first time and switched it with the travelstar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neo1

So you are buying it pre-assembled then? I think you should consider putting it together yourself. It took me around 2 hours, from when i got the parts with the mail, to when i could boot the PC and start installing XP. On top of that, i got some really high quality components and it cost me the same as a pre-assembled PC with much lower specs.

---

For a laptop?

No, no. Neo was suggesting it for my desktop.

I'm considering buying a second hard drive. that's for sure. Meanwhile I understand SATA drives are only an issue during XP installation. I will need a floppy with the specific SATA drivers. My XP license is not OEM, but is pre SP2. So I could almost bet I cannot install XP without that floppy disk. Correct?

Meanwhile, it's pre-assembled because I'm buying it from large store which doesn't offer the ability to customize, but guarantees me three things: their own warranty extending one year over that of the assembler, immediate delivery and a low price (note those 449 euros include a 19'' Samsung TFT and a Lexmark x3550). Unbeatable. Later, if I so wish, I can upgrade the parts myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mario F.

I'm considering buying a second hard drive. that's for sure. Meanwhile I understand SATA drives are only an issue during XP installation. I will need a floppy with the specific SATA drivers. My XP license is not OEM, but is pre SP2. So I could almost bet I cannot install XP without that floppy disk. Correct?

---

Depends. Some motherboards certainly support native sata mode, I think it's called. It allows you to use your SATA disks as if they were PATA.
My motherboard supports such as feature, for example. I don't need drivers to install XP on any of my hard drives.
If it doesn't support it, then you will need a floppy drive or a slipstreamed WinXP CD.

Okies. I'll see about that tomorrow. It's been so many years I don't do this, that thiongs that were just natural then, skip my mind now; i.e. I didn't ask about the mobo. Don't know brand, make, model. But will check about that stuff tomorrow.

Ok. Thanks all for the help. Cheers

The T51's built-in hard disk comes with crash protection - an accelerometer watches for hits and immediately moves the head away from the disk, so a head crash is extremely unlikely.

Might i ask, what specs does your current PCs have? Not the ASUS i mean, but the old one?

The old laptop is dead. I believe it burned something inside.

It was a P3 1 Ghz, 500MB and 20GB HD. Toshiba Satellite Pro 6000. Shipped with both Windows 2000 and XP. Quite the fancy laptop in its time. Excellent all around and lasted me 6 years through sun and snow being on for what was maybe an average of 14 hours daily.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mario F.

The old laptop is dead. I believe it burned something inside.

It was a P3 1 Ghz, 500MB and 20GB HD. Toshiba Satellite Pro 6000. Shipped with both Windows 2000 and XP. Quite the fancy laptop in its time. Excellent all around and lasted me 6 years through sun and snow being on for what was maybe an average of 14 hours daily.

---

You are going to be in for a treat with that C2D!

:)

hehe

Under optimal conditions, I think the C3D may well have 10 times the computing power of that system. This assumes a perfectly multi-threaded application making use of advanced SSE capabilities if available - like 3d rendering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CornedBee

Under optimal conditions, I think the C3D may well have 10 times the computing power of that system. This assumes a perfectly multi-threaded application making use of advanced SSE capabilities if available - like 3d rendering.

---

Even in an application that isn't multi-threaded, that will be the case. Try to compare the 23-24 seconds that an E4500 uses to calculate a 1M test in SuperPI, against whatever a P3 @ 500mHz uses, it will be less than a tenth. And SuperPI is neither multi-threaded nor does it use advanced SSE - it was developed in 1996.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neo1

Even in an application that isn't multi-threaded, that will be the case. Try to compare the 23-24 seconds that an E4500 uses to calculate a 1M test in SuperPI, against whatever a P3 @ 500mHz uses, it will be less than a tenth. And SuperPI is neither multi-threaded nor does it use advanced SSE - it was developed in 1996.

---

It does, however, use a fair amount of memory, and on a modern CPU, it probably fits within the cache (or a large portion gets placed in cache), whilst the older processors with smaller caches will struggle. Memory and related controller logic being 4x or so faster (peak speed) will also help a fair bit. And yes, of course, the processor running about 4x the clock-speed will also be beneficial.

--
Mats

They have a Quad there for 599 Euros without monitor. But comes with 2Gb Ram only and an onboard graphics card. I think its perhaps too much anyways since I plan on using only XP on it and later migrate to Linux.

To be honest I'm more excited about the Thinkpad. Ever since CornedBee mentioned it, it got stuck in the back of my head. I had heard good remarks about them before. But my immediate search revealed, as I said a few posts down, they are poorly represented in Portugal. But after getting annoyed at Asus and Toshiba, I decided "what the heck". Ordered it from the web today. It will take maybe 14 days to get here. And they are black!

I'm going to get the desktop later today at around 8pm. I'm not going to risk getting annoyed again (because of that SATA drive) so I went the extra mile and decided to add a 160GB PATA from a local store. First I'll see if SATA is native or I can boot from an USB stick in which case I will install the SATA drivers on the stick (the desktop comes with no floppy drive). If both fail, I'll drive there quickly and get the PATA drive.

You'd think a C2D ready mobo can boot from USB?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mario F.

You'd think a C2D ready mobo can boot from USB?

---

What motherboard is it? Shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes to figure out...

Quote:

---

And they are black!

---

Oh now that's just racism!


Edit - Matsp:

All valid points, i do however believe that the performance jump will easily be 10 times, still. My new machine is atleast 4 times faster than my old Celeron D, and that one is still considerably faster than an old P3...

I don't know, bleh. I saw Asrock on the chipset on a picture in the box. I'm ridiculous, I know...

I think it was this one or something very similar. The image is almost a look-a-like.

http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.as...33-2.66G&s=775

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mario F.

I think it was this one or something very similar. The image is almost a look-a-like.

http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.as...33-2.66G&s=775

---

RTFM then ;)

I know I'm behaving like a kid, but these things have changed so much. I can't recognize half the new acronyms, abbreviations and terms...

Anyways, is it what they call "Ready-to-Use" USB ports?

EDIT: Ok. Nevermind. I think I got it. The manual speaks of user togable legacy USB support, which is I think what I need in order to have it available prior to the OS installation.

I might be a little late but the E4xxx series is getting a bit old and is being replaced by the E7xxx series. The E7200, which has the same release price of a E4500, has a higher frequency, SSE4.1 support, more L2 cache, higher front side bus and may be a bit more energy efficient since it's a 45nm chips vs 65nm. The performance difference isn't huge between those two, but the E7200 is leading. Of course, this kind of information is more interesting if you buy your parts by yourself than if you buy a pre-assembled system.

As for the SuperPi calculation time (1M digits) between a C2D vs a P3, here's some results on my own computers:

• C2D (3.0 GHz, 6MB L2): 15 sec
• P3 (1.0 GHz, 256KB L2): 2 min 25 sec

The first system is 1 month-old and the second is... near to 9 years old.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxman

C2D (3.0 GHz, 6MB L2): 15 sec
P3 (1.0 GHz, 256KB L2): 2 min 25 sec

---

10x faster. Quiet accurate the predictions in the past posts.

Meanwhile yes, I could see E7xxx's. But precisely as you said it, being pre-assembled I couldn't get quiet the optimal configuration. If I remember correctly these machines where being sold as part of more featured-rich systems, consequently more expensive. And that just doesn't fit with the usage I want to give to this desktop.

Ok, I found all I need. To wrap it up (and thanks a bunch to everyone who posted. You people are awesome. Even though we may disagree on other issues, I love this little corner of the web and couldn't make it without you)

- All AsRock boards support boot from USB device, which basically guarantees I can load the SATA drivers from a USB stick during XP installation.

- More important though... AsRock boards have this:

Attachment 8199

Which, if it means what it seems to me, I will not even need to worry about the drivers.

If some people are still interested, here's one article I remember reading, where they compare some of the C2D processors from different series.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...duo-e7200.html

I am thanks. I'm suddenly gaining a renewed interest in these matters.