L7200, L7400 Released but slower clocks
L7200, L7400 Released but slower clocks
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?
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
Previous Models: A21p, A30p, A31p, T42, X41T, X60s, X61s, X200s
-
pianowizard
- Senior ThinkPadder

- Posts: 8368
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:07 am
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
- Contact:
Re: L7200, L7400 Released but slower clocks
Isn't that what enables it to consume much less power?dfumento wrote:The problem is Clock rate of L7200 is 1.33 GHz vs T7200 is 2.0 GHz. What gives?
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Re: L7200, L7400 Released but slower clocks
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.pianowizard wrote:Isn't that what enables it to consume much less power?dfumento wrote:The problem is Clock rate of L7200 is 1.33 GHz vs T7200 is 2.0 GHz. What gives?
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).
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
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
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.
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.
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
Previous Models: A21p, A30p, A31p, T42, X41T, X60s, X61s, X200s
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
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
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
-
T440s getting slower and slower everyday
by Whitieiii » Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:47 am » in ThinkPad T430/T530 and later Series - 9 Replies
- 1499 Views
-
Last post by Whitieiii
Sat Mar 18, 2017 1:16 am
-
-
-
T430: Any disadvantage to using mSATA SSD besides slightly slower OS launch?
by serpico » Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:53 pm » in ThinkPad T430/T530 and later Series - 10 Replies
- 902 Views
-
Last post by axur-delmeria
Mon Apr 24, 2017 4:46 am
-
-
-
T540p no backlight (but there is picture)
by abgersaurus » Thu Jan 05, 2017 6:50 am » in ThinkPad T400/410/420 and T500/510/520 Series - 15 Replies
- 1547 Views
-
Last post by nitrocaster
Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:20 pm
-
-
-
X220 - Both WiFi and Cable Internet stopped. It connects but no Internet.
by jgrobertson7 » Sun Jan 22, 2017 10:14 pm » in ThinkPad X200/201/220 and X300/301 Series - 3 Replies
- 709 Views
-
Last post by ajkula66
Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:25 am
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests






