• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Slow I7 to quicker I5 in old Laptop

FatRakoon

FatRakoon

FatRakoon

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
10,449
Location
Behind you... Naked!
My old Laptop is a HP DV6. Its got an I7 CPU thats only a 1.6Ghz thing, but it does have 4 Cores with HT and so shows up 8 Logical.

Its not shabby, its not at all a bad little setup and I have toyed with some basic games, and it does give even some more intensive games a shot, however, I am mostly using it for normal every day use and it does not do that much gaming to be honest.

Anyway, I was having a bit of a nosey around, and I have found an I5 thats has only cost me £8 and so, I have grabbed it.

This I5 however, is more like the I3 in that it is not quad core, but rather dual core with hyperthreading... I hate how they do that with some I5 CPUs... I understand, but I still hate it.

Anyway, the point being, that it is 2.66Ghz and so, a whole 1Ghz quicker per core, but of course half the cores.

This will have the benefits of it being quicker for single core apps, but of course slower for multicore ones.

Now, of course when I bought it, I did assume that it was a proper 4 core CPU and so 4x2.6 =104Ghz and the I7 is 4x16=64Ghz + 4xlogical and I assume that HyperThreading is about 25/30% boost but added up, it will be much less than 104Ghz Im sure???

Basically meaning that the I5 should have been faster than the I7 in both single and multicore apps.

This however, is now not happening because its a 2+2 CPU not a 4+0 one.

I hope Im clear here cos I have just made myself go toilet in my head.

The thing I am asking now, is... Is it worth it?

Is it worth going from 4x16 to 2x2.6 or shall I just chalk this down to jumping in before I read the spec next time?
 
Ah, I have not actually done the change over yet.

The I7 is still in it.

I was not actually doing much, I was more bored and in the zone for upgrading something and it just so happened that I picked on that laptop and gave myself 5 minutes to see what I could do for it, more than anything in any real serious path to enlightenment.

But you really think that the extra boost on the two would not be worth it?

The way Im looking at things, is that I gave my mate an old I3 a couple of years ago. It was a Socket 1156 and so fairly aged, but then a short while later, I gave him an I7 to plonk into it instead.

IIRC, the I7 was 2.8Ghz and the I3 was 3.2, and of course the cache difference was there, but thats an aside for now... when my mate swapped them over, he thought the I7 was rubbish in comparison and he went back to the I3

Now, I then told him the differences between the 2 CPUs and that for raw power and grunt, the one I just gave him was vastly superior, but he said that he preferred the older one, as that felt snappier and much more responsive??

I think that was perhaps placebo more than actual fact, but its a similar thought process that I was thinking of with this I5

Sure, I am going to drop some cache, and sure, I am going to lose half the cores, but I will however, be gaining an extra 1Ghz for the 2 cores I do have.

So, surely, for things like office apps and the like, it should actually feel a tad nippier surely?

Now, that said... it cost me way les than a tenner, so it was just a bit of fun, and yes, I would definitely get a better CPU, should I happen upon one, but the only ones I have found that are I7 are only 1.8 ( for the 4+4 )and even the 2.0Ghz ones are 2+2 so they are also liar CPUs too! ( Unless I missed the proper ones of course )

But if I did find a proper 4 core I5 at 2 or above, then that should be a better option than the current I7 I have surely?

I suppose the thing is, that there are so many different variations on the CPUs that it can be a confusing place to work out WTF you are looking for? - I mean... I have only really found out in the last year or so, about 2 core I5s with HT and even I7;s!!! - WTF?

I thought that I3 = 2+2 , I5 = 4+0 and I7 = 4+4 and that was it, but then I find that I3, I5 and I7 can be had with only 2 cores plus HT and the only diff is the cache... Thats bloody naughty if you ask me.

Ok, I am waffling, so im out.
 
by all means try it just to satisfy your curiostity. i dont think youd see any difference, untill you tried something that needed cpu power and the i7 would have more.
maybe you watch flash/html video(youtube) on it, that takes some power in 1080p if there is no gpu hardware acceleration.

www.cpu-world.com is a good resource and of course google
search the model number steppings e.t.c e.t.c to find the next model up or what cpus your laptop supports.
 
Yes, curiosity in my case, often kills the PC and the cat gets off scott-free! LOL

I think that I am aware, that real raw power will only come from the I7 here.

We also need to be aware, that its only 1.6Ghz and thats awfully slow, even for an I7
True however is that it IS the full 4 core with HT and so 8 Logical and that, is definitely its only plus.
This I5 I did originally think that it was 4 core, as in 4 true cores, and the seller made out that it was, but I find out AFTER the sale, that its not, its 2 core with HT.

Now, had it been the true 4 core, then it would be a serious contender to replace the I7 however, as it is... It simply is not.

I am of course fully aware, that when it comes to requiring real power, the I7 would be the better option in this case, against that I5, but my thoughts as still unmoved :-

As a basic setup, for most of what I need it to do, I still feel that 2x2.6 would still be faster and more responsive than 4x1.6 in almost all cases.

I will absolutely be giving a few games a shot, absolutely I will, but these are low end games ( mostly ) as the graphics is not that powerful... ATI 4850 IIRC ?? ).
From memory, and the few times that I did in the past try some serious gaming on this Laptop, I found that playing Dawn Of War was glitchy in that it kept speeding up and slowing down for a split second.... I narrowed this down, to the fact that the CPU kept jumping into turbo mode and then over heating and then dropping back... Once I stopped it down this, the game smoothed out, but was a slightly slower game... it just got smoother.

Now, this was with the game running 4 cores at 1.6

Would it be a similar result with the I5?

And lastly, this is an old Laptop. I dont actually need to boost it one bit. Its now my Linux Laptop and running Linux, its doing a gorgeous job, and its plenty quick.

But as we all know... no matter how fast somehting is, we are never actually satisfied are we?

Hey everyone, I just got the new intel Skylark octohyperquad turbo++ CPU, its got 256 Cores with HT and its running at 100THZ... Its over 1000000 times faster than anything else ever dreamed of!... Lets over clock it!

We all know the score there dont we?
 
Difficult one, but I suspect the 2.66 2C4T will feel faster than the 1.6 4C8T. Mainly because I get that impression going from 2-ish to 3 GHz on a regular quad core.

It's impossible to know without trying.
 
I have looked but failed to find a CPU that is actually a proper CPU.

I mean, I have found 2 core with HyperThreading, and I have found that even the I7 CPUs are that too!

How Intel have the gaul to call them that I dont know... They are bloody I3 CPUs with a better cache thats all they are!

In many ways, I suppose, that since this one, while only 1.6Ghz, is still 4 core with HT and so shows up as 8 core, well at least it is a real I7, so I have that I suppose?

It does also turbo out at 2.8 and I can lock it to 2.8 ( but the heat is something seriously worrying - If only I could get that sorted out )

But my newer Laptop, is a much newer I7 and on batteries, that boots up at 2.8 and on adapter, it boots at 3.2 and when I compare both these laptops at 2.8, the Newer one is way ahead of the older one... Just shows just how much better and quicker, newer CPUs are.

But like I said, this one is 1.6 and then switches to 2.8... I can lock it at either speed.

It is a huge shame, that I cannot lock it anywhere in between... That would be fantastic. Just enough to give me a boost, but not enough to make those fans attempt to break the sound barrier, and I would be happy.

I think that maybe Zipp0r is right, but I will have a play... I just wont expect much, and if I get happy, then bonus, if not, then I did not pay much for the CPU at all, and so who cares? yeah?

Thanks guys.
 
If you own both cpu's as you do and you are capable of swapping them out yourself and swapping back if need be then all it will cost you is a couple of hours of time and a couple of squirts of thermal paste to test them both out. I'd do it and if you do please report back here to let people know how different they are for doing real world uses.
 
FatRakoon said:
I have looked but failed to find a CPU that is actually a proper CPU.

... I can lock it to 2.8 ( but the heat is something seriously worrying - If only I could get that sorted out )

... Just shows just how much better and quicker, newer CPUs are.
Click to expand...

You've answered your own musings. In power-limited situations it's hard to utilise a high-clocked many-cored CPU.
 
nashathedog said:
If you own both cpu's as you do and you are capable of swapping them out yourself and swapping back if need be then all it will cost you is a couple of hours of time and a couple of squirts of thermal paste to test them both out. I'd do it and if you do please report back here to let people know how different they are for doing real world uses.
Click to expand...

I dont own the I5 YET.

I have bought it, and I thought I would ask a few Q's when I realised that it was NOT a quad core, but a dual core, to have an idea what to expect.
As a Quad, I would be happy to swap it out, but as a dual core, maybe not so much.

And yes, normally I would be more than happy to plop them about, however I now only have the full use of one hand and so doing even silly little things like swapping the CPUs around, can take me a great deal of time. I get confused very easily too ( I had a big accident 3 years ago that disabled me both physically and mentally ).

joeyjojo said:
You've answered your own musings. In power-limited situations it's hard to utilise a high-clocked many-cored CPU.
Click to expand...

I suppose, yes.

zipp0r said:
wait, your 1.6 i7 boosts to 2.8?
Click to expand...

Yes. Its a fair jump to isnt it?

The Laptop in Question is the HP DV6 3180ea with the I7 720QM CPU

I have swapped the HD for a 120GB SSD for root and an 8GB Swap, and the DVD for a 1TB Hybrid Drive for /home and it now has 8GB RAM so its nippy as hell.
 
FatRakoon said:
Yes. Its a fair jump to isnt it?

The Laptop in Question is the HP DV6 3180ea with the I7 720QM CPU
Click to expand...

ah. in that case, without a doubt the cpu you already have is WAY faster.

Model number ? i7-720QM
Frequency ? 1600 MHz
Turbo frequency 2800 MHz (1 core)
2400 MHz (2 cores)
1733 MHz (3 or 4 cores)

there are TWO faster model i7's that will likely fit but now i see it will turbo up, there isnt much point upgrading. unless you want +133 or +266 mhz ontop of your current turbo speeds.

and if you're having heat issues... clean the cpu heatsink, they get filled with fluff and use something like artic silver 5 on the cpu instead of the standard crap.
 
I'm considering the same, to get an old alienware m15x to run arma3 decently.

Which should theoretically do wonders, because I only need two, real fast cores for that.

Not having much luck finding me an i5 - 580m though :(

Something to consider, is, if the cpu is getting hot it might be throttling, so...If you don't actually need the cores/threads from the i7 plopping the i5 in there will drastically reduce the heat (2 less cores worth of heat) and will deffo boost up to full boost without throttling.
 
zipp0r said:
ah. in that case, without a doubt the cpu you already have is WAY faster.
Click to expand...

I think, the wording whould be "Capable of Being" way faster.
The fact that the fans give it some serious welly, also mean that its kind of beyond my grasp for it to be any kind of useably faster, other than being an irritating tease.

zipp0r said:
and if you're having heat issues... clean the cpu heatsink, they get filled with fluff and use something like artic silver 5 on the cpu instead of the standard crap.
Click to expand...

Been there done that, got the T-Shirt, the ceremonial plates, ate the cheese sarnies, and stole the silverware. It was among the first things I have tried, and among the last too! - I have also bought an entirely new cooler for it, in the hope, but alas... nothing doing.
 
Return it?
It cost me £8
It would cost me that to return it just to get my £8 back... It simply wont be worth it.
I will accept my loss. and move on.

I was unable to check the specs, as there was not a clear enough pic, and the seller seemed a little bit ignorant to the CPU details anyway... I think they were probably ignorant to the fact that it was dual core.. Perhaps they simply saw 4 cores in the device manager and accepted that as what it was... That is fully understandable.

And again as I said, it cost me less than a tenner... Even if I was conned by someone who knew exactly what they were doing, Im not going to lose any sleep over it.
 
CPU turned up this morning.

I suppose I should have done some better benches...

Current thoughts are simple... playing Dawn of War for 10 minutes did NOT make teh fans start to spin, and playing the game felt like it was just that little bit smoother.

Did it though, or was it placebo?

I dont have any actual benchmark apps for Linux, and so, what I am going to do, is take the Disks out, and plonk in a couple of spares, just to toy about with some benches and apps that will help me decide, and I will take it from there.

Like I said... the jump from 1.6 to 2.6 has been sort of noticeable, and the 2.6 has seemed to benefit me on one game, however, what I have kind of done, is halved the cores, but doubled the speed ( Im rounding off here people - A Lot yes, but still rounding off LOL ) and so there is no doubt that 4x1.6 is going to total more grunt than 2x2.6 but at the same time, that only comes into play when apps know how to utilise the 4 cores fully.

Ah we shall see.

Next time I update will be AFTER I have done some serious testing and I will post any results that I find...
 
FatRakoon said:
Return it?
It cost me £8
It would cost me that to return it just to get my £8 back... It simply wont be worth it.
I will accept my loss. and move on.

I was unable to check the specs, as there was not a clear enough pic, and the seller seemed a little bit ignorant to the CPU details anyway... I think they were probably ignorant to the fact that it was dual core.. Perhaps they simply saw 4 cores in the device manager and accepted that as what it was... That is fully understandable.

And again as I said, it cost me less than a tenner... Even if I was conned by someone who knew exactly what they were doing, Im not going to lose any sleep over it.
Click to expand...

If he sold you something which wasn't as advertised, simply put in a complaint and he will be made to pay for postage back to him. Done it loads of times
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom