L7200, L7400 Released but slower clocks

X60/X61 series specific matters only.
Post Reply
Message
Author
dfumento
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 891
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:27 pm
Location: Manhattan, NY

L7200, L7400 Released but slower clocks

#1 Post by dfumento » Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:39 am

The low voltage Core 2 Duo processors have been released so expect them in X60s soon and the tablet as well.
The problem is Clock rate of L7200 is 1.33 GHz vs T7200 is 2.0 GHz. What gives?
X201s: 1440x900 LED backlit 2.13 GHz, 8 GB, 160 GB Intel X25-M Gen 2 SSD, 6200 a/b/g/n, BT, 6-cell, 9-cell, Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1, Verizon 4G LTE USB modem, USB 2.0 external optical drive, Lenovo USB to DVI converter
Previous Models: A21p, A30p, A31p, T42, X41T, X60s, X61s, X200s

pianowizard
Senior ThinkPadder
Senior ThinkPadder
Posts: 8368
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:07 am
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Contact:

Re: L7200, L7400 Released but slower clocks

#2 Post by pianowizard » Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:10 am

dfumento wrote:The problem is Clock rate of L7200 is 1.33 GHz vs T7200 is 2.0 GHz. What gives?
Isn't that what enables it to consume much less power?
Microsoft Surface 3 (Atom x7-Z8700 / 4GB / 128GB / LTE)
Dell OptiPlex 9010 SFF (Core i3-3220 / 8GB / 8TB); HP 8300 Elite minitower (Core i7-3770 / 16GB / 9.25TB)
Acer T272HUL; Crossover 404K; Dell 3008WFP, U2715H, U2711, P2416D; Monoprice 10734; QNIX QHD2410R; Seiki Pro SM40UNP

brumwald
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 3:47 am
Location: Sweden

#3 Post by brumwald » Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:39 am

Isn't that the always/often the case?

That the LV and ULV versions are clocked lower. The reason for this is probably marketing - just to make up the quite steep price for them.

Although the difference were quite big this time, that makes me believe that they have a big problem producing them. First that it took them so long to do that and secondly because of that low frequency. Hope they get it sorted out and glad I didn't wait for them.

Compare it for the L2400 for instance (which my x60s uses).

L7200
1.33 GHz
17W TDP

L2400
1.66 GHz
15W TDP

I'd imagine that the L2400 would perform quite a bit better than the L7200 (relatively) - also if one relies on the TDP values (which one maybe shouldn't) it also consumes less power. Although as said I wouldn't rely on them.

Anyway, the real difference seems to be better performance for L2400 but 64 bit support for L7200, and I don't think that 64 bit is going to help the L7200 that much.

Sure I'm speculating here and I have no idea about prices. But since it is labeled L7200 it's probably going to cost atleast as much as the T7200.

So if I'm right maybe lenovo won't use them at all for a while, or they might fall for the marketing advantage of a core 2 duo and use them anyway.

Not thrilled by the looks of this...

edit:
They do have 4 mb cache though.
So the L7400 with 1.5 GHz should be the best LV CPU but I can imagine that it will cost a bit too.

gunston
ThinkPadder
ThinkPadder
Posts: 1306
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD AUST
Contact:

#4 Post by gunston » Thu Jan 25, 2007 4:15 am

:lol:
luckily, my L2400 1.66Ghz hasn't phased out yet...
1. T43 2668-B97 14" SXGA+ 1.5G RAM 9cells
2. X60s 1703-CA3 powerful

sxr71
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 5:33 am
Location: New York

#5 Post by sxr71 » Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:50 pm

Remember they are Core 2 Duo and should perform slightly faster clock for clock. However, I doubt that even the 1.5Ghz L7500 will keep up with the L2500 1.83GHz. They say that the performance of Core 2 over Core(1) is about 10-12% so if true it might be comparable to a 1.66GHz Core(1).


I don't use very processor intensive apps on my laptop so if the battery life is significantly better on the L7500 I am inclined to get the new L7500 unless they really drop prices on the L2500 models (which I doubt).

If battery life on the L7500 is no better than on the L2500, I wouldn't hesitate to order the L2500.
Last edited by sxr71 on Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

sxr71
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 5:33 am
Location: New York

Re: L7200, L7400 Released but slower clocks

#6 Post by sxr71 » Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:53 pm

pianowizard wrote:
dfumento wrote:The problem is Clock rate of L7200 is 1.33 GHz vs T7200 is 2.0 GHz. What gives?
Isn't that what enables it to consume much less power?
Remember the L2500 is also low voltage and clocked lower than the regular voltage processors. These are just clocked even lower because they probably expect that the new Core 2 architecture makes up for the clock speed drop. To be sure these new processors won't increase performance over what we currently have.

RUSH2112
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 352
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:00 pm
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

#7 Post by RUSH2112 » Sat Jan 27, 2007 8:49 pm

I don't imagine that the 330MHz will account for much difference. If you need performance, maybe a non-s X60 or even a T60 is better for you.
Besides, I'll bet that the 4MB cache and the 64-bit enhancements will make up for the 330MHz loss (and then some, perhaps).
Thinkpad X60s 1704-69U / Vista Ultimate
www.frattaroli.us
We go out in the world and take our chances
Fate is just the weight of circumstances
That's the way that lady luck dances
Roll the bones

tomh009
Moderator Emeritus
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 3021
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:30 pm
Location: Kitchener, ON

#8 Post by tomh009 » Sat Jan 27, 2007 9:01 pm

At the same clock speed, a mobile Core 2 Duo (with 4MB cache) will probably be 15% faster on CPU-intensive tasks than a mobile Core Duo. It's the same architecture, but enough tweaks to get some more speed out. Anandtech benchmarks here:
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2808

That should mean that the L7400 (1.5 GHz) should perform somewhat better than the L2400 (1.67 GHz), and the L7200 should be only 5-10% slower.

dfumento
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 891
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:27 pm
Location: Manhattan, NY

#9 Post by dfumento » Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:51 pm

I currently have Core 2 Duo 2 GHz, but I'm thinking of getting a X60 tablet when they get the Core 2 Duo's but I think they will come with the low voltage variants L7200 and L7400.
X201s: 1440x900 LED backlit 2.13 GHz, 8 GB, 160 GB Intel X25-M Gen 2 SSD, 6200 a/b/g/n, BT, 6-cell, 9-cell, Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1, Verizon 4G LTE USB modem, USB 2.0 external optical drive, Lenovo USB to DVI converter
Previous Models: A21p, A30p, A31p, T42, X41T, X60s, X61s, X200s

RUSH2112
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 352
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:00 pm
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

#10 Post by RUSH2112 » Sun Jan 28, 2007 1:30 pm

It kinna stinks that the X60's have the CPUs soldered in. I would really have liked to be able to just buy a C2D chip for it.
Thinkpad X60s 1704-69U / Vista Ultimate
www.frattaroli.us
We go out in the world and take our chances
Fate is just the weight of circumstances
That's the way that lady luck dances
Roll the bones

tomh009
Moderator Emeritus
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 3021
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:30 pm
Location: Kitchener, ON

#11 Post by tomh009 » Sun Jan 28, 2007 2:01 pm

It really doesn't make a huge performance difference -- the only thing is that you would gain the 64-bit capability.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Thinkpad X6x Series incl. X6x Tablet”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests