Speed difference between processor speeds L1.4 to T2.0

[ComputerMinder]

hi,

I have decided to purchase an X61 or X61s over purchasing T61 (which I don't think I need at the moment).

Does anyone know exactly what is the price difference in percentage between a low voltage 1.4 processor (such as in the X61s) to a full voltage 2.0 processor.

I am only able to get the 1.4L processor for the X61s where I live. So I was wondering what would be the speed difference. Remember this is not just 0.6GHz we are talking about, but also difference in voltage.

1.4 Low volrage vs. 2.0 full voltage processor.

The thing is, I can either get an X61s 1.4 or an X61 2.0. so I was wondering about the speed difference.

[politicorific]

The differences really depend on what kind of software you'll be running.

Check out this review:
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.a ... eview=X61s

I haven't run zcpuid in a while, but since this is not a gaming machine - sure you can play flash games, battleships forever/other similar geometry wars type games but nothing really 3d. I have to ask what you'll be doing. If it were a tablet version I could understand manipulating huge photoshop files with hundreds of layers, running filters nonstop, but on a non-tablet version? And converting DVD's to dvix is also out since there's no dvd drive. Sure from time to time, but dedicating this machine?

Of course, I look at computer from the XP angle. That OS has been speedy enough for nearly any processor on the market for the last four years. Basically any AMD 1.8ghz chip or second revision Pentium 4s has managed just fine in any day to day task. Add Vista to the mix and everything changes.

[khyew]

I'm with politicorific. Your choice will depend on your planned use of the X61. A 1.4Ghz low-voltage Core 2 Duo is plenty of muscle for any day-to-day work you can expect to do.

I opted for the 2.0Ghz CPU, but now regret this decision because a low-voltage processor would have run all my programs fine with the added bonus of lower heat output and slightly extended battery life.

Remember this is not just 0.6GHz we are talking about, but also difference in voltage.

CPU voltage does not directly affect performance. Higher voltages boost the S/N ratio within the CPU and allow it to perform at higher frequencies without introducing errors. A low-voltage 1.4Ghz CPU would be equivalent to a standard 1.4Ghz CPU in all but power consumption.

[mfbernstein]

With proper power management, the difference in battery life won't be big. At best, the 2GHZ model will offer 30% higher performance than the 1.4GHZ model on CPU-bound tasks. On the other hand, it's not much more expensive either.

[ComputerMinder]

I am not using it for games or photoshop. but let me tell you this, i cannot afford the machine to run slow. I will be using it on Vista Business or Ultimate. I am dealing with several office program open at the same time and running Outlook with a 5gb PST file to which I need to do rapid searches on. The computer will be connected to two 1920x1200 displays.

Regarding speed, let me tell you this, I currently have a P4 3Ghz 2GB Ram and it is super slow with all the tasks I am running, outlook is crawling, so I would say speed is definitly important.

mfbernstein you said [With proper power management, the difference in battery life won't be big. At best, the 2GHZ model will offer 30% higher performance than the 1.4GHZ model on CPU-bound tasks. On the other hand, it's not much more expensive either.

I say WOW, 30% difference wtih L1.4 to T2.0 is a major difference. The battery difference isn't important to me. If it would be 7.8 hours to 7 hours it's plenty either way. I don't like the extra weigh thought. I thought the performance difference is about 15% and that is quite negligble for me, but 30% differene is major so maybe must go for the 2.0 full voltage processor. What do you think ?

[mfbernstein]

I am not using it for games or photoshop. but let me tell you this, i cannot afford the machine to run slow. I will be using it on Vista Business or Ultimate. I am dealing with several office program open at the same time and running Outlook with a 5gb PST file to which I need to do rapid searches on. The computer will be connected to two 1920x1200 displays.

That may not be possible. Machine only supports a single monitor, and none of the PCMCIA video cards I've seen offer dualhead for more than 1600x1200.

Regardless, you're going to want a lot of RAM if you want both Vista and very large PSD files. That and a 7200RPM hard drive upgrade will make a more significant difference than the processor speed.

mfbernstein you said [With proper power management, the difference in battery life won't be big. At best, the 2GHZ model will offer 30% higher performance than the 1.4GHZ model on CPU-bound tasks. On the other hand, it's not much more expensive either.

I saw WOW, 30% difference wtih L1.4 to T2.0 is a major difference. The battery difference isn't important to me. If it would be 7.8 hours to 7 hours it's plenty either way. I don't like the extra weigh thought. I thought the performance difference is about 15% and that is quite negligble for me, but 30% differene is major so maybe must go for the 2.0 full voltage processor. What do you think ?

I said _at best_ 30%. Meaning 30% is the greatest possible difference. In most cases, I would expect it to be less, although if you use Photoshop a great deal, it may not be too far off. If you're really concerned about speed, there's also the 2.2GHZ model...

I'd say, unless you need the ultimate portability, the 2GHZ X61 (not s) is a good bet. Faster, and (slightly) cheaper is hard to argue with. And for memory and hard disk upgrades, buy from a 3rd party, Lenovo charges an arm and a leg...

[ComputerMinder]

That may not be possible. Machine only supports a single monitor, and none of the PCMCIA video cards I've seen offer dualhead for more than 1600x1200..

I will be using the MatroxTripleHead2Go Digital and it has been confirmed to work fine.

Regardless, you're going to want a lot of RAM if you want both Vista and very large PSD files. That and a 7200RPM hard drive upgrade will make a more significant difference than the processor speed.

Yes thanks, I know regardless if I go for the X61 or X61s I am going to get 4Gb RAM and 7200RPM drive.

mfbernstein you said [With proper power management, the difference in battery life won't be big. At best, the 2GHZ model will offer 30% higher performance than the 1.4GHZ model on CPU-bound tasks. On the other hand, it's not much more expensive either.

I'd say, unless you need the ultimate portability, the 2GHZ X61 (not s) is a good bet. Faster, and (slightly) cheaper is hard to argue with. And for memory and hard disk upgrades, buy from a 3rd party, Lenovo charges an arm and a leg...

Thanks for the info. I think I will go for that option. I will make up my mind soon. Anyone else would like to comment?