Processor or Speed of processor ? which is more important for a laptop?

Question

I am looking for a new laptop and was thinking about getting a dual core but I realized their speed is very low and around 1.6. I also found some basic intel celeron or pentium processors which has higger speed which is around 2.4. So what is more important to have a higher speed laptop, I know i3-i5 are very good but they are also expensive so I will stick with old fashion processor. So higher speed or more core ?

Answer 1

More speed = faster battery drain. The new sandy bridge chip is faster than the I7 at lower power consumption

Answer 2

The type of processor is the most important. GHz by itself means absolutely NOTHING. It's like trying to compare two cars by only looking at the size of their tires. Celerons are terrible processors. Pentium Dual-cores are low-end as well. You should not stick with an "old fashioned" processor as old fashioned processors actually cost more because they are no longer being produced.

I think a Pentium Dual-core or a Core i3 would be good for you, as long as you don't plan to do any gaming.

Answer 3

Honestly, without knowing what you intend to use the laptop for, it's hard to say whether a single core, higher speed processor is better than a dual core, lower speed processor.



In general, multi-core/multi-thread processors are better for multi-tasking. If you intend to surf while listening to music while keeping office documents open while using an instant messaging program while using your webcam... then a dual core processor is better than a single core processor, regardless of whether the single core is faster.



Now, if you are the kind of person who doesn't pile on the programs... where you intend to surf while messaging... OR listen to music... OR watch a movie... you know... not someone with a short attention span... then that faster single core processor would be better than the slower dual core. You intend to focus the processing power of your laptop onto as few programs at one time as possible, and you will see the results with the faster, single core.



So, it's all back on you now. You have to decide what you intend to use your laptop for, and how you intend to use your laptop, in order to find out which would be better... a faster single core, or slower dual core.



end of line

Answer 4

If you want the buy new laptop you must see cache memory because cache memory depend on you processing speed see 2.26 GHz / 512 is a cache memory / 533 is bus speed but in general process cache memory 512 kb and dual cores 1 M.B and core to duo 4 M.B and quard pro 8 M.B approximately not confirm but in all thing main role of cache memory and see the detail.

Answer 5

For a home computer the speed counts the most.... For a laptop you will need a energy saver type of processor but overall I would go for the name brand processor because a lot of fast processors overheat or faulty because they try to do too much

Answer 6

For processors that are built with the same generation of internal architecture, clock speeds are comparable and significant. For processors of very different architecture, they aren't.



Most programs are single-threaded, meaning that they can only run on one core at a time. For these programs, the speed at which the program runs depends on the clock speed of the processor. A program running on a processor at 3.0 GHz will run twice as fast one running on a processor at 1.5 GHz. Having dual cores won't help, because these programs can only run on one core at a time.



However, the situation changes if you are running programs that are designed to execute multiple threads. A program that has two threads internally, for example, can run on two processors at the same time. So if you have a dual-core processor, the program can use both cores at once. In this case, having two processors at 1.5 GHz (2 x 1.5 = 3 GHz total) will give you better performance with this program than one core at 2.0 GHz (1 x 2.0 = 2 GHz total).



Having two or more cores can also make the system more responsive. With two cores, and given that most programs can only use one core at a time, you have fewer problems with programs that hog a processor for themselves. If you have two cores, a program might tie up one core completely, but as long as it has only one thread, the other core is unused, and remains available for the rest of the system. This keeps the system responsive even when you're running a program that pegs a processor.



So it all depends on what kinds of programs you run. If they are multi-threaded, they'll perform better on multiple cores than on a single core, and their total performance will be roughly in line with the total horsepower of the CPU (n cores times x clock speed). So a dual core at 1.5 GHz will perform better than a single core at 2.0 GHz. But if most of your programs are single-threaded, you're better off with a single core at high clock speed than multiple cores at a low clock speed. A dual at 3.0 GHz will work better than a quad at 1.5 GHz, even though total horsepower is theoretically the same. The only advantage to multiple cores if you have mostly single-threaded applications is that you can run more than one application at full speed, or you can run one application at full speed and still have an extra core(s) for the rest of the system, which keeps your system from bogging down.



Be aware that this all applies for cores of similar architecture. With processors that use different architectures, the more advanced architecture is faster for a given clock speed. So an i7 processor is a lot faster than a Pentium 4 processor, even at the same or lower clock speeds.

Answer 7

it all depends on what you will be using the laptop for, if you run a lot of applications at one time, you are going to want more cores. More cores = faster multi-tasking. if you are just using the laptop for everyday use, it really does not matter.