core2 duo vs quad core

[Ed Kukla]

Lenovo thinkpads have a choice:

core2 duo t9600 2.8ghz

quadcore p9000 2.0ghz

And the winner is?

[Ron Evans]

Depends on what you are going to do with it and what software you are going to use. IF your software can only use one core then obviously the core2 duo t9600 2.8ghz will be the winner. IF the software can use all cores then likely the quad will be the winner. What OS are you going to use. The answer is not straight forward. Do you want to do more than one thing at a time? Can the software you have actually do more than one thing at a time? You may well find that none of the software you have will utilized the cores at 100% anyway as other parts of the PC will be the bottleneck and the CPU choice may not be the limiting factor. There may be little in the performance difference on a benchtest.

Ron Evans

[Ed Kukla]

Gee thanks Ron, you made it even more confusing! To be expected I guess.

With Windows, I'll use one of the 64 bit versions. I'm still on the fence over which NLE. Either Premiere or Vegas.

I don't think I'll do much with multiple apps open.

Thnx

[Bill Koehler]

If it makes any difference...

I do know that on my desktop machine, when I render HDV to DVD from Vegas Movie Studio 9, Task Manager tells me the CPU Utilization goes to 90% - 100%. The program SpeedFan confirms that and tells me the CPU temps also go way up. So I know all cores are very busy.

I periodically check on HP's HDX 18t Model. For me, the premium Intel wants for the Mobile Quads is just to much. I keep waiting for it to come down...

[Ed Kukla]

Bill

I have no idea wat you just said...speak english please!!!

[Bradley Ouellette]

I would go with the core2 duo t9600 2.8ghz. It's not fiscally two 2.8ghz processors. It's just one divided into two sections for better multitasking.

And the quad is only 2.0 ghz. Will suffer compared to the core 2 duo, even as it is still the same one processor divided into four. But it is in a laptop, there won't be as much power going to them, so it will stay at stock, no room for overclocking. So I honestly see the C2D 2.8ghz as the winner. Not really a contest. Especially for when you are going to only be rendering your projects, it will make a huge difference...

[Tripp Woelfel]

Ed... If you're going with Premier, you want the Quad Core. Premier Pro will use multiple cores to process your work so Quad Core processors will have twice as many processors working for you. With your choices, the P9000 will give you noticeably quicker processing than the Dual Core.

I went from a Dual Core 3.0 gHz to a Quad 2.4 gHz and the performance improvement was significant for most of the work that I do.

The processor numbers you give seem a bit slow by today's standards. I have a two year old laptop with 2.0 gHz and my Quad is about a year old. There are faster processors out there. If you're working in HD with interframe compression (AVCHD, MPEG-2, etc.) you'll want the fastest processor you can afford. If you're working in SD intraframe compression (DV, etc.) then the processors you list will be just fine.

[Marcus Martell]

Same opening question?If i have to use SONY VEGAS PRO?

[Ed Kukla]

Originally Posted by Tripp Woelfel

The processor numbers you give seem a bit slow by today's standards. I have a two year old laptop with 2.0 gHz and my Quad is about a year old. There are faster processors out there.

Where are you finding faster processors?

The fastest laptop dual core I've seen is 3.0ghz, the Lenovo I quoted is 2.8ghz.

[Ed Kukla]

Originally Posted by Marcus Martell

Same opening question?If i have to use SONY VEGAS PRO?

Vegas seems to scale quite well.

I have an older laptop with a dual 1.6ghz processor and 2g of ram and a demo of Vegas runs pretty good. I haven't loaded it down with a lot of effects but basic fades and titles run without rendering.

[Tripp Woelfel]

Originally Posted by Ed Kukla

Where are you finding faster processors?

The fastest laptop dual core I've seen is 3.0ghz, the Lenovo I quoted is 2.8ghz.

Sorry. I was considering desktops too. My first choice for editing HDV, which is what I do, would not be a laptop and I want all the processing power I can lay my grubby mitts on.

[David Chilson]

I have been working on my new workstation and the I7 is the way to go. After a couple of days I have the 920 up to 3.4GHz running 12gb Corsair ram at 1700. I have attached a SiSandra screen grab to show the comparison against a stock I7 and several other quad and dual core processors. If you are going the workstation route, I can highly recommend it.

[Christopher Jensen]

Originally Posted by Ed Kukla

Lenovo thinkpads have a choice: core2 duo t9600 2.8ghz quadcore p9000 2.0ghz And the winner is?

Hi Ed – Lenovo commonly offers 4 CPU choices on the W700 series laptop that your original post was referring to. Your original question essentially (which is a better choice – a Core 2Duo T9600 at 2.8Ghz or a Quad Core Q9000 at the slower 2.0Ghz) is easier to answer if you add the price issue to the mix.

The common CPU options for the Lenovo W700 Laptop and the price premiums are:
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo processor T9600 (2.8GHz 1066MHz 6MBL2) [standard/included]
Intel® Core™ 2 Quad Core Processor Q9000 (2.00GHz 1066MHz 6MBL2) [add $375.00]
Intel® Core™ 2 Extreme processor X9100 (3.06GHz 1066MHz 6MBL2) [add $875.00]
Intel® Core™ 2 Quad Core Extreme Processor QX9300 (2.53GHz 1066MHz 12MBL2) [add $1,275.00]

The others who responded made many valid points.
In the current case it really comes down to:

Is it worth it to pay an extra $375 to switch from 2Core mobile at 2.8Ghz to a QuadCore mobile at 2.0GHz? For now – the recommended answer is no.

There are lots of technical benchmarks you can review that will demonstrate performance differences of quad core at slower speed outperforming dual core at higher speed and vice versa. The nuances of those benchmarks are frequently debated at length in other online forums but they often lose sight of whether the technical differences really matter much or represent any meaningful guidance when selecting a new system.

The Lenovo W700 Laptops also offers a 200 nit WXGA Screen and a 400 nit WUXGA (1920 x1200) screen for an additional $175. You may find the extra resolution, brightness and expanded color gamut make the 400 nit WUXGA screen a better option than an incremental processor upgrade.

As you are comparing CPU’s you should also consider the GPU factor into your purchase decision. More video applications are beginning to take advantage of the GPUs on the video card.

The stock Lenovo W700 Laptops use an Nvidia Quadra FX 2700M video card. The Nvdia 2700M takes advantage of an Nvdia technology called CUDA. If the video applications you are using have CUDA support, some processes (filtering effects, encoding) can be sped up dramatically.

Lenovo also offers an upgrade to the Nvida Quadro FX 3700M card for $400. The 3700M video card has double the memory (1 Gb versus 512MB in the 2700M) and a little over 2.5 times the number of GPU cores (128 versus only 48 in the 2700M).

Depending on the applications you are using, the expanded GPU capability of the Nvidia 3700M may make way more of a difference than the increment CPU upgrade.

In the future , the quad core versus dual core issue will largely disappear as the dual core CPU’s are phased out. Right now, the price premium for the Quad-Core mobiles doesn’t represent a great value as many of the current applications do not perform a very impressive job of optimally utilizing multiple cores.

If you decide to pursue a desktop based solution, some of the current Intel i7 quad core chips do have a compelling price and performance advantage over their dual core desktop alternatives. The Dual CPU Xeon 5500 series workstations are also available if maximizing performance is your focus.

If you go with a laptop as your original post indicated, you are likely to get more benefit from the better screen and better video card than you will in paying an inflated premium for a mobile quad core cpu.

--Christopher Jensen

[Dave Blackhurst]

For video applications, the Quad cores usually shine over dual core, it's very noticeable in EVERY test I've run across. If you're editing HDV or AVCHD, a quad is almost a necessity, and the i7 appears to be the best bet by far, but not available in a laptop as of yet...

Video editing has a different set of needs and expectations than the typical "gamer" machine, and you need to examine the actual USE of the machine, the intended applications and then make the choice. From everything I've seen quad core becomes the better choice for video editing/rendering - reduced render times and smoother edits balance the additional costs relatively quickly if you're doing anything serious.

[Brian Boyko]

Both Sony Vegas and Adobe Premiere can take advantage of multicore solutions.

I think you'll get faster render times with the 2.0GHz Core 2 Quad.