t4220 sxga??

Discussion in 'Fujitsu' started by kureshii, Jun 7, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BenI

    BenI Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Yeah, I completely understand what you mean.
    It just fusturates me that they would go ahead and do something like this.
     
  2. matts22

    matts22 Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    I am new to the forums and I've just about decided to go with either the t4215 or t4220. There are a couple things that are making the decision difficult, and one is the monitor like you guys are talking about.

    However, the more I think about it, the more I wonder: why do you need SXGA on a 12.1" screen? I mean, I like things small, but that is almost to the point of being unreadable isn't it? Could someone post a screenshot of the resolution cranked up on a SXGA monitor on a 12" screen? I would like to see how it compares to what I'm currently using (15.4" screen with higher resolution).

    Secondly, if SXGA is that important, why not just go with the 4215? I mean, what is the real advantage of the Santa Rosa processors? I know the FSB is 800 (vs. 667), but the RAM is still 667, so won't the FSB operate at 667 anyway? And the processors on the old chips go to 2.16 Ghz...so unless you were going to get the 2.4 Ghz Santa Rosa processor, you won't see any difference. The only reason I can see for getting the newer processor is that you get the updated graphics card. But is it really that big of a difference?

    So basically, you have to decide which is more important: SXGA (and better battery life based on reviews) or a processor that won't meet its potential until 800 Mhz RAM is available and a slightly better graphics card. Am I right here?

    The thing that I would more like to see is a 7200rpm hard drive. Is there an aftermarket one available that you could swap onto these tablets?

    Ideally, Fujitsu would offer 800Mhz RAM to go with the Santa Rosa tablets, an SXGA monitor, and a 7200rpm hard drive. But you take what you can get I guess.
     
  3. koss

    koss Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    There has been enough threads about advantages of Santa Rosa. While they are not revolutionary, and some of the potentials are not fully utlized due to drivers, etc.. But it's still enough to make a big different on me..

    As for 800Mhz RAMs.... New Egg has them cheapo! My stand is very flexible on replacable parts - CPU/RAM/HD/etc.. But I make pretty firm stands on parts that cannot be replaced (mobo/display/etc).
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 18, 2015
  4. Charles P. Jefferies

    Charles P. Jefferies Administrator Super Moderator

    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Right now my laptop has a 15.4" WSXGA+ 1680x1050 display and I really enjoy its resolution. It has enough space for me to comfortably do my work. I would also be fine with SXGA+. However, regular SXGA (1280x1024) is barely enough and going to XGA would be an hindrance. I won't use a resolution that low, especially with Windows Vista. I am confident I will be fine with the text size on a 12.1" SXGA+ monitor.
    The processor's FSB frequency is not determined by the RAM. The Santa Rosa C2D's FSB runs at 800MHz. Whether the memory runs at 667MHz or 800MHz makes no difference.

    Here's my story - I upgrade my computer every two platforms generally speaking. Currently I am using a Sonoma Pentium M-based machine that I bought in 2005. It chokes on Vista (which I loaded in January when the OS came out) and I am really looking forward to finally getting my first dual-core machine. As for why I just don't go for a T4215 - I can't do that. It is built on technology that is almost a year and a half old and while it is still fast, Santa Rosa offers a performance boost and other advantages as mentioned, some of which have yet to be exploited. Getting a machine based on the previous Centrino Duo technology will mean that I have waited over a year for nothing. Santa Rosa is two platforms ahead of my current notebook and it is what I am going to buy, period.
    Yes, check www.newegg.com. You need 2.5" SATA drives.

    Edit: koss beat me to some stuff. :)
     
  5. matts22

    matts22 Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    Three things:

    1. How can the 667 Mhz RAM not hinder the performance of the 800 Mhz FSB? While it does not affect the fact that it is still "800 Mhz" your computer will simply be waiting on the RAM instead of the FSB, effectively slowing the system down as if the FSB was 667.

    2. I said that 800 Mhz RAM was not available because I want to purchase the laptop with 4GB of RAM. I have not seen the 2GB one's available yet.

    3. Thanks for the link to the 7200 rpm hard drives. I might have to swap that out if I end up getting one of these.
     
  6. Charles P. Jefferies

    Charles P. Jefferies Administrator Super Moderator

    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    41
    The Core 2 Duo does not require huge amounts of memory bandwidth like the Pentium 4. 667MHz memory is more than enough to supply the Core 2 Duo with the bandwidth that it needs.
     
  7. matts22

    matts22 Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    So what is the advantage of the 800 Mhz FSB? This is where I am confused on what you are saying...if the Core 2 Duo only needs 667 Mhz from the memory, and the FSB is responsible for communicating with the RAM, how could it ever operate at 800 Mhz? (or even above 667?)
     
  8. stever

    stever Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    More memory bandwidth is always better... it's true that Core 2 is not as bandwidth-hungry as the Pentium 4 architecture, but it can still outstrip any DRAM you can buy, and two cores makes the situation twice as bad. Recall that each of those cores can issue a memory access every cycle at 2+ GHz. The details are much more complicated (you have to consider cache hit rates and block sizes, etc.) but you will never have "enough" memory bandwidth.

    To be concrete about your original question, if you have two matching DIMMs you will be running in dual-channel mode, so you effectively get 2x 667MHz peak bandwidth. Thus in fact your 800 MHz FSB is still the bottleneck.
     
  9. matts22

    matts22 Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    Ok that makes sense...thanks!
     
  10. SilverIce74

    SilverIce74 Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    ------------------
    Your WSXGA+ monitor has a DPI of 128
    The 12.1" XGA has a DPI of 118
    The 12.1" SXGA+ has a DPI of 144

    If your current resolution is enough, I really doubt you can see much difference between 118DPI and 128DPI at 24" away from the screen.

    --------------
    ---------------------------

    Though this is true for the newer AMD archectures (hypertransport) it is not (to my knowledge) the case for intel ones. If your memory is 667Mhz your bus will run at 667Mhz and your CPU multiplier will be set higher to compensate. Edit: Okay it looks like intel can probably run its FSB at a different speed.

    I admit its been about 5 years since I took this stuff in school. However, assume I'm wrong for the moment. A fast FSB is still a meaningless concept without fast memory, else what are your going to quickly communicate with? The only thing close to 800Mhz is the ram. So yes running the RAM at 667
    does make a difference. Having a 9 million GHZ FSB would make zero difference.

    That being said, historically only really memory intensive apps see any benifit from such nominal increases in memory access rates. I'd be more concerned with buying cheap RAM and getting crappy lattency.

    Edit: Intel still uses the old system bus architecture, I can't beleive this.... Looks like the extra 133Mhz might get used if the memory is being accessed at full rate and other devices are being accessed as well.
    http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/GM965/gm965_diagram.htm
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_microarchitecture

    So you might not want to but 800Mhz ram in your santa rosa machines. This is probably why intel rates it as only using 667Mhz RAM; anything higher and it would use the entire FSB bandwidth which could cause lag when trying to comunicate with other devices.

    http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/GM965/index.htm

    Edit: (again :)) Forgot about dual-channel. The FSB can't keep up to the memory in either the 667Mhz case or the 800Mhz case for intel chips.

    ---------------------------
    ---------------------------

    One note about the new chips. Your ignoring the risk in buying a brand new chipset which could actually have much higher heat, much lower battery-life, much higher failure rate, etc.

    Just look at the old P4 lineup, the socket 775 (i think those are the ones) were much much hotter then the previous chipset (which led to a lot of broken computers before companies got the fan solutions right). So the lastest, isn't always the best.

    I'd also add that Santa Rosa is going to be refreshed in a few months, with the 45nm Penryn processor, making the current platform outdated. The new processor will support the latest SSE instructions, which when utilized can make huge improvments. Though many lazy programmers still don't take advantage of them.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page