Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

QX9300 or W3520 on a Notebook?

Last response: in CPUs
Share

Which would you choose?

Total: 2 votes (1 blank vote)

  • Notebook #1: QX9300 at 3.7 GHz with Dual HD3750's in Crossfire with RAID 0 and 6GB RAM for $2525
  • 0 %
  • Notebook #2: W3520 at 2.66 GHz - 3.4GHz with GTX 280M with a primary 128GB SSD and a secondary 250GB 7200 RPM drive and 4GB RAM for $2400
  • 100 %
September 28, 2009 7:36:11 AM

This isn't quite a thread for the Notebook section (building my own between two different barebones sets), so I thought I'd post here in the CPU section.

First off, this will be my workstation notebook. I do my gaming on my desktops. When I'm on vacation, I'm usually not playing games on my notebook, but working remotely. Therefore, I'm not choosing my notebook based solely for gaming and on the graphics cards (the mobile CPU notebook will have Dual HD3750's in crossfire, and the 1366 socket CPU notebook will have the GTX 280M), but the CPU's instead. The graphics cards are just a bonus.

I'm also using my mobile 4GB DDR3 1066MHz memory from my existing laptop, a 2.5" 250GB 7200RPM hard drive, and a 17" WUXGA 1920 x 1200 display as well as a 9800GT GPU as a back-up replacement.

Notebook #1: Intel® QX9300 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Quad 2.53GHz w/12MB L2 On-die cache - 1066MHz FSB ($1080) with Dual HD3750's in Crossfire. Total ($2525)
Will include: A 250GB 7200RPM hard drive, which I'll put in RAID 0 along with my existing 250GB 7200RPM hard drive.
Also, comes with 1 module of 2GB DDR3 1066MHz memory, which I'll combine with my existing 4GB DDR3 1066MHz memory for 6GB total.

or

Notebook #2: Intel Xeon W3520 45nm "Bloomfield" Quad-Core 2.66GHz 4 x 256KB L2 Cache 8MB L3 Cache LGA 1366 130W - 800/1066MHz FSB ($300) with GTX 280M. Total ($2400)
Will include: A SSD Crucial CT128M225 as my primary hard drive, and my existing 250GB 7200RPM hard drive as my secondary.
Also, will only have 4GB DDR3 1066MHz memory since the barebones notebook will not come with any.

Overclocking:
Notebook #1 can support overclocking on the QX9300. I've overclocked notebook CPU's before (just lap the heatsink and apply Arctic Silver 5). The motherboard BIOS will actually support overclocking on the Q9100 and QX9300. I've heard overclocking going to 3.7 GHz with this CPU.

Notebook #2's support for overclocking is unknown. Perhaps they only allow overclocking on unlocked CPU's (so the i7 975)? However, I'm not wanting to spend more than the $2525 or $2400 on a notebook computer. If I can find a way around it (softmod), I know I could probably overclock the @3520 to at least 3.4 GHz with low voltages. I wouldn't complain having a quad core laptop with stock frequencies at 2.66 GHz anyways. :) 

I'm leaning on Notebook #2, just because I can put money towards a SSD 128GB hard drive, the CPU can later be used to build a desktop once the motherboard fails, it's $125 cheaper, and I can later upgrade and buy another GTX 280m to SLI. The only negative is overclocking is still an unknown from my research.

More about : qx9300 w3520 notebook

a b à CPUs
September 28, 2009 8:03:36 AM

Go for the second one,first of all u can get another GTX 280M which is good,also that xeon is built on the Bloomfield family which performs great and better than QX9300.

QX9300 is a good CPU too but the Xeon one is better,about OC'ng well u can get to 3.0GHZ maybe with QX9300,going higher isn't recommended also it will become hotter too.

So i would chose the second one :) 
September 28, 2009 8:34:46 AM

rich boy's problems ;)  go for the xeon
a b à CPUs
September 28, 2009 9:43:13 AM

Without a doubt, if you have to chose between those two, 100% go for the first one. The W3520 is a 130W rated desktop CPU, while the QX9300 is a notebook CPU rated at 45 watts. The second would have zero battery life, run absurdly hot, and overall be a worse choice.

I'd get a mobile i7 notebook over either though. You can get the Alienware M15x with an i7 820 QM, a GTX 260M, 4 gigs of RAM, a 500GB 7200RPM drive, and a 9 cell battery for around that same price. It would probably beat both of the above on battery life by a huge margin, while having plenty of processing power when you need it (more than the QX9300, although less than the W3520).

Alternatively, there's the Sager NP8690. When configured with the same CPU as the Alienware, GTX 280M graphics, 4GB of RAM, 1080p screen, and a 160GB Intel X25-M (awesome SSD), it costs $2559.

Both of those choices are better than either of the above IMHO - the Alienware would be the best for battery life, but the Sager will win on graphics. Either would probably beat both of your above choices in battery life, while not sacrificing computing power.
September 28, 2009 11:53:50 AM

good point, didn't thought of it
September 28, 2009 1:34:20 PM

cjl said:
Without a doubt, if you have to chose between those two, 100% go for the first one. The W3520 is a 130W rated desktop CPU, while the QX9300 is a notebook CPU rated at 45 watts. The second would have zero battery life, run absurdly hot, and overall be a worse choice.

I'd get a mobile i7 notebook over either though. You can get the Alienware M15x with an i7 820 QM, a GTX 260M, 4 gigs of RAM, a 500GB 7200RPM drive, and a 9 cell battery for around that same price. It would probably beat both of the above on battery life by a huge margin, while having plenty of processing power when you need it (more than the QX9300, although less than the W3520).

Alternatively, there's the Sager NP8690. When configured with the same CPU as the Alienware, GTX 280M graphics, 4GB of RAM, 1080p screen, and a 160GB Intel X25-M (awesome SSD), it costs $2559.

Both of those choices are better than either of the above IMHO - the Alienware would be the best for battery life, but the Sager will win on graphics. Either would probably beat both of your above choices in battery life, while not sacrificing computing power.

I need the real estate space of a 17", plus, having a spare 17" WUXGA is always nice. I'm not sure how you're saying the i7 820QM has more processing power than a quad core QX9300 @ 2.53 GHz at stock settings with a L2 12MB on-die cache.

I'm not looking for battery power. I'm always plugged in whenever I'm working, anyway. The Intel X25-M is not as good as the Crucial or Corsair SSD's I'm looking at.
a b à CPUs
September 28, 2009 1:56:07 PM

El_Capitan said:
I need the real estate space of a 17", plus, having a spare 17" WUXGA is always nice. I'm not sure how you're saying the i7 820QM has more processing power than a quad core QX9300 @ 2.53 GHz at stock settings with a L2 12MB on-die cache.

I'm not looking for battery power. I'm always plugged in whenever I'm working, anyway. The Intel X25-M is not as good as the Crucial or Corsair SSD's I'm looking at.


I7 has a very high turbo boost that can run in circles around a core 2 quad on single threaded applacation and can be comparable on speed when all 4 cores are running. Also The i7 has Hyper threading to make it an 8 logical core cpu. This mean you can multitask a lot better than you can on either one of those cpus.
!