I have a dilemma . . . i7 vs Core 2 Extreme Quad

I am busy shopping for my new laptop gaming rig and I have come to a point where I am finding it hard to make a decision, hence this thread...
I need some input, in case I am missing something and even just to hear what you folks suggest and recommend.

Here are the specs for the 2 rigs, there are not substantial differences imo, but there are enough to make me think a bit more.

Rig 1:
Intel Core 2 Xtreme Quad QX9300 2.53GHz (12MB cache, 1066 MHz FSB)
ATI CrossFireX - Dual 1GB ATI HD 4870
17" WUXGA 1920x1080 (1200p)
8GB DC DDR3 (1333MHz)
2x 256GB SSD (Raid 0 - performance)
Dual Layer DVD Burner (DVD+-RW, CD-RW)
Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit

Rig 2:
Intel Core i7 920XM 2.0GHz (3.2GHz Turbo Mode, 8MB cache)
1GB NVidia GTX 260M
15.6" WideFHD 1920x1080 (1080p) WLED
8GB DC DDR3 (1333MHz)
1x 256GB SSD
Dual Layer DVD Burner (DVD+-RW, CD-RW)
Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit

That's it... as you can see the big differences between the 2 is a smaller screen, 1x GFX, 1x SSD in Rig2, but it has the i7.
I am also thinking of upgrading the opticals to Blu-Ray in both of them.

I am leaning towards the 17" (Rig 1), due to having more real estate and obviously bigger specs, but am not sure what difference the i7 will make in Rig 2, if any.

Let me know what you guys think.

It depends really what u need the pc for?

Core i7 920 needs triple channel ram so u need to spec for 6GB instead

Core i5 750 and Core i7 850 do not need Triple Channel.

Considred maybe an AMD alternative?

It's a laptop. I will use it for everything and anything - work and play. I don't really have a desktop, but I may buy a gaming one as well, in addition to this.

I only have the option for the i7's in Rig2, same for the Core 2 Quad's in Rig1.

Thanks, I forgot about the triple channel! fk.

No, AMD is not an option.

Well let me help you out :)
I will give you some screenshots and a simple score card to light the way.
Lets start off with comparing the 2 cpus:
http://i.imagehost.org/0453/cpubench...comparison.jpg
Rig 1 Vs Rig 2
Rig2 leads 1 vs 0

Now lets look at the two GPU's
http://i.imagehost.org/0745/gpuhierarchy.jpg

Both GPU's are compared nicely. Lets see what a benchmark says:
Go here for a detailed benchmark , the GTX 260 won , barely.


Thats Rig2 leading by 2 vs the 0 for Rig 1.

Rig 1 has 2 drives in a stripe set , +1 for RIG1.
Rig 1 has a bigger screen (i dont see the performance increase here so i wont add a score here)

Both have the same amount of ram , both DDR3.
Both have the same OS and the same dvd roms.

Rig 2 wins the match by 1. for having a faster CPU
and with the GPU (barely) outperforming rig 1's GPU.

Im not a nvidia / ati fan boy , benchmarks is all i look at , proof is in the pudding.
As for the CPU , id say rig 2 looks alot nicer after doing some research.

Have fun and let us know what you decided to get :)

Thanks for that kerbyross, I appreciate it.

It's strange that (Dual, XFire) 2x 1GB 4870's loses out to 1x 1GB GTX260?

For the i7 though, I will have to lower the RAM to 6GB, which I am not too happy about... maybe I must just stay with 8GB RAM anyway.

The CPU stats speak for themselves though... i7 is way in front.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lilDeath

Thanks for that kerbyross, I appreciate it.

It's strange that (Dual, XFire) 2x 1GB 4870's loses out to 1x 1GB GTX260?

For the i7 though, I will have to lower the RAM to 6GB, which I am not too happy about... maybe I must just stay with 8GB RAM anyway.

The CPU stats speak for themselves though... i7 is way in front.

---

You are right about that .. i was doing it at 2 in the morning :P lol..
You do know what this means dont you ?

Rig 1 wins , +1 for the 2 drives +1 for the dual graphics and you have the bigger screen you wanted , slightsly slower cpu but that makes rig 1 the winner there.

What to do ?

Keep rig 1 as it is or be upset about the memory and make rig 2 win ?
Ponder ponder ..

Hhmm... I wonder if I will even notice the differences between the CPU's... at what levels will I have to push these rigs to know that the max is hit for the Core2X CPU, whereas the i7 will still be coping...

I do tend to use the laptop quite extensively with hundreds of browser sessions, e-mail programs, several management apps, java apps, a few other management sessions and then sometimes 2 games at the same time...
I also hibernate for long periods at a time, sometimes for as long as 2-3 weeks at a time.

hhmm...

Also, I just noticed that you selected the wrong Core 2 Quad in the screenie... Rig1 one has the Core 2 Extreme Quad 2.53GHz, which is higher up in the list, although about halfway.

At least it is not at the bottom anymore. :)

Also, I am reading some threads on Toms where people are saying that if you are going with i7's, you should go XFire as well...

Also found this article... quite a nice read and it is clearly showing the differences between CPU-intensive and GPU-intensive games.

I am starting to draw the conclusion that putting an i7 920XM CPU in the laptop is not worth it, especially if it there is not enough GPU power, which can typically only be supplied with SLI / CrossFire.

http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=3647

The plot thickens . . .

buy a cheap laptop for work and what not.

spend the rest of a proper gaming desktop pc is my advice.

gaming laptops will always be fail :-/