The P7350 Laptop Processor runs at 1066 MHZ FSB, consuming 25Watts of Power, clocked at 2.0 Ghz. L2 Cache is 3MB.
The T6500 Laptop Processor runs at 800Mhz FSB, consuming 45 Watts of Power, Clocked at 2.1 Ghz. L2 Cache is 2MB.
On Paper (according to Specs), the P7350 is faster than the T6500.
However during Real-Life benchmarks, the performance difference between the two processors is negligible.
If you are looking for longer battery life and less heat, get the P7350.
If you don't care about battery life, the T6500 will get the job done.
The T6500 is a standard entry/mid-range Processor. If you want to do multitasking or gaming, you might want to consider faster clocked processor, at least 2.2 Ghz or better (Intel Only).
The P series line of Laptop Processors by Intel are new Models called Penryn. The speeds are similar to the old T series processors, however P series consume less power and produce less heat than their predecessors. So yes, the P7350 is better.
Remember for gaming you will need to look for a Dedicated Graphic Card for the Laptop.
An Radeon HD 4570 is a medium range graphics card (Dedicated) for a Laptop for casual to moderate gaming. Its a decent card that will get the job done. 512MB memory is good enough for most games.
Again this depends on what PC Games you are playing.
(Games such as: Crysis, Far Cry 2, Mirror's Edge, BioShock 2, S.T.A.L.K.E.R: Clear Sky, GTA IV will probably need a better Graphics Card and Processor than what you currently have)
If you are moderately gaming (2+ Hours a Day) with the laptop, think about investing in a Laptop Cooler/Stand.
From the CPU comparison charts on notebookcheck.net I am able to confirm obsidian86's claim.
I have a P9700 and love it, since it's the fastest 25-watt CPU Intel makes. (it's actually 28 watts...)
It seems strange to me that the P9700, a newer chip than the T9XXX series, should do worse at multitasking, despite having comparable clock speeds, FSB, and cache.
Does anyone know what the deal is? Maybe a CPU-Z comparison would reveal non-parity in features? Errata? Something else?
All the benchmarks for the P series fall in line with the T series at comparable clock, FSB, and cache with the exception of wPrime and Whetstone (Cinebench, I believe) benchmarks. In these two categories, they are almost twice as slow as the T series!
I'm still happy. Just wondering. Also, the P9700 is much cheaper than both the T9600 and T9800. Is that because Intel's production costs for the chip are much lower? Somehow I doubt that....
January 8, 2010 6:20:31 AM
The difference in P and T series performance is how Intel has tweaked the settings so P series can manage with lower power settings. The multipliers are on the lower side in P Series (stock settings) so performance in certain tasks , esp. multitasking falls..