Mobile Gaming: Can Core i7-2920XM Beat Desktop Core i7-980X?

[Wish I Was Wealthy]

I still like desk tops,but I am glad that I did not buy the core i7 980X...It costs so much & I have already bought the core i7 975 quadcore,so I was not going to buy another major cpu in haste just yet...Although I was tempted to,but I ended up not buying...

 

[Guest]

LOL, when i clicked conclusion, an AMD ad came up.

 

[Guest]

Both the process are really very good but i7-980X is really has all the features which required for the latest game for play.
http://www.google.co.uk

 

[danwat1234]

[citation][nom]reynod[/nom]I think ubercake has something here.My 14 year old kills laptops like they are opponents on a rugby field.He has 4 scalps so far ... By comparison I have only had to replace his PSU and Graphics card on the desktop in his room over the same period of time (2 years).I think apple and toshiba might offer him a job ... as a crash test dummy !![/citation]

Give him a Panasonic Toughbook as his next laptop! Maybe get the previous generation so you can save some $$

 

[danwat1234]

So, I have a question.
We know that Sandy Bridge is more aggressive with it's Turbo'ing than the first generation i5/i7 chips.
Were the benchmarks done for a long enough time for the chips to heat up, so that super Turbo'ing would have attributed to the new mobile chip doing so well? In this case this article would be showing basically the 'burst' performance that the chip can do but not sustained. Is this the case or were the benchmarks done long enough on both processors to call it sustained performance?

I know that some Turbo'ing will still happen even after the chips are at 100% utilization for some time, just as long as temperatures and TDP haven't been reached.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]danwat1234[/nom]So, I have a question.We know that Sandy Bridge is more aggressive with it's Turbo'ing than the first generation i5/i7 chips.Were the benchmarks done for a long enough time for the chips to heat up, so that super Turbo'ing would have attributed to the new mobile chip doing so well? In this case this article would be showing basically the 'burst' performance that the chip can do but not sustained. Is this the case or were the benchmarks done long enough on both processors to call it sustained performance? I know that some Turbo'ing will still happen even after the chips are at 100% utilization for some time, just as long as temperatures and TDP haven't been reached.[/citation]The 980X is clocked higher. It's clocked higher at base frequency, it's clocked higher at turbo frequency.

 

[hmetin]

How can I learn that Tom's hardware has bought or received this processor complete and publish this article?

My processor has A6 and D1 revision even I bought it 2.5 months after than this article was released.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]hmetin[/nom]How can I learn that Tom's hardware has bought or received this processor complete and publish this article? My processor has A6 and D1 revision even I bought it 2.5 months after than this article was released.[/citation]AFAIK it came that way from Clevo. Lots of companies sell Clevo-made notebooks.

 

[hmetin]

My laptop is Asus.

 

[compuservant]

Try a Hp dv7t-6100 series. For $1050 (with rebates and an easily available online coupon) you can get 17.3 inch screen (1080 p for a bit more), dynamic graphics that lets you switch between the onboard Intel DH 3000 and the Radeon 2GB HD 6770, 750 GB hard drive with a second drive bay that already includes a caddy and a motherboard that will accept that sata gen 3.0 SSD when the prices comes down, Blu-Ray writer, Bluetooth, a 6 cell battery and a 9 cell secondary battery. All for $1050. It also supports Quick Sync and Intel Wireless display (WiDi).
I doubt even the $2000 June SBM build would best it. I could add a Dell U2711 for $850 or the Apple 27 inch (2560x1440) for $900. Combine that with the Bluetooth keyboard and mouse I already have. Voilà!