Has anyone used these processors for Logos 4. It's in an alienware machine but I wanted to know if it would run Logos 4 OK as it is below the recommended 2.0 ghz?
It sounds like it should run pretty well. The graphics memory and ram seem to be the real keys to performance. You may want to check out this thread and run the benchmark test to see how you measure up. http://community.logos.com/forums/t/24555.aspx?PageIndex=7
One thing I that is out-of-date about the current minimal requirements is the processor speed. Today there are quad core CPUs available none of which are 2 GHZ or better but would certainly run Logos faster than a 2 GHZ dual core machine.
I think it would be a challenge for Logos to vet every processor now available and spec which ones were adequate. My feeling is that the processor you have referred to is too slow. It is at the bottom of the i5 processor speeds. I would not personally consider it. I hope there are others here who better understadn these things who can give you advise. If not, I would shy away.
Although this is Dual Core I see it has 4 threads.
That would in essence create four cores (would it not?).
If so, you should be fine.
My 4 core machine (see specs) has no problem handling L4
As Fred says, graphics (if as it looks, is embedded) could be a concern.
If you have the cash, I'd max out the 8Gig Ram. Consider putting in at least 6 Gig.
All the best
The i5 hyperthreading is superior to the designs from past processors, but a single hyperthreaded core still does not benchmark as well as two cores with hyperthreading turned off. It is highly dependent on the workload.
I participated on a team which benchmarked early versions of the Nehalem processors for use in high performance computing arrays. In general, the hyperthreading benched better than what Intel projected. We examined ways of mixing the workloads in order to get the most out of the hyperthreads. So the rule of thumb is that more cores is better than fewer with hyperthreading.
This discussion has gone beyond my knowledge. I wouldn't know a hyperthread from a pulled muscle.[*-)]
I wouldn't go for this because there are many excellent i5 mobile processors on the market that perform better and are more future-proof eg. the i5-400M series. Of course if you need the UM because its low thermal output suits a netbook then it may be quite adequate.
Looking at benchmark list http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html noticed entry 231 bit below 1.5 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo and tad above 1.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo - yet some benchmark numbers compared favorably with faster Intel Core 2 Duo's (up to 1.8 GHz, matching Turbo speed) - not know if benchmark(s) correlate with Logos usage - your mileage may vary.
Appears Intel Core i5 520UM is faster than minimum CPU, but slower than recommended => http://www.logos.com/support/techfaq
Keep Smiling [:)]
Looking at benchmark list http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html
Thanks for the link. Lots of info on that site.
Thanks for all the help with this - I am looking for as small a laptop as I can get (13-14") but also to future proof as well.
Anyone know about the Intel Core 2 Duo SL9400? Again is there a place to check performance of these CPU's as they seem all over the place. This one has 6MB cache which seems good.
I assume the main factor is CPU speed and HDD access - am i right?
Thanks
Benchmark 140 => http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html bit below 2.1 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo T5850 and tad above 2.0 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo T6400
Good graphics with dedicated memory also helpful; comparison => http://www.notebookcheck.net/Comparison-of-Laptop-Graphics-Cards.130.0.html
and big benchmark list => http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html
My notebook has a Core 2 Duo T7300 processor running at 2 GHz. It is now 3 years old and met the minimum standard when L4 was released. It ranks 128 in the chart KS4J referred you to. The SL9400 Processor ranks below it at number 140, and the i5 520UM ranks way lower at 231. There are no test results for the i5 processor so maybe they are wrong to rank it so low. The SL9400 would probably be OK but would meet only the minimum specs. I haven't shopped smaller notebooks so don't know what other options there are, but I don't think either of these processors would help future-proof you.
For future, may want to wait a week - with Intel formally announcing Sandy Bridge processors at Consumer Electronics Show (CES) on 5 Jan 2011, anticipating many new models and price drops on older models.
Forum http://community.logos.com/forums/t/24555.aspx may be interesting - benchmark comparison by many Logos 4 users (and some humor).
Keep Smiling [:)] + Happy New Year [*]
Please don't go with old processors. Look at a system with i5-xxxM (not UM) processor, 1024 MB dedicated graphics, at least 600 GB hard drive. Go to a retail shop where they are on display and running, and compare their Windows Experience Index. It should be around 5.8 but the other individual figures should be > 6.0, especially the graphics. The hard drive or memory could be the low score (5.8) but that is OK. Then go by the rest of the package.
Unfortunately will have to purchase off the net. In NZ don't have lots of shops selling high end notebooks - especially with small screens. Just done some research with Novabench and the two I have been looking at come out at around 800 or 840 which is good. My desktop - Intel 4 2.4 is at 184
Intersting that the 1G Radeon Mobile 5650 is better than the 2G Nvidia GT425M - and lifts the score on a slower processor.
So probably best to go for the heavier bigger machine with a little more punch?
I had only compared the Windows Graphics scores with a few other machines of interest and none of them had 2G! Good to see that my HD 5650 is confirmed as a good 'un!
Go for what you can afford and what best suits your other requirements. I didn't go for the most powerful (the i5 is dual core, low thermal output) nor was I concerned about 7200 RPM drives and SSD. Its NovaBench score (703) confirms what the Windows Experience Index showed me in the shop! It runs Logos4 without a problem.
In NZ .....
What/where is the mountain in your avatar?
It's on the top of Mt Ruapehu - the middle of the North Island. My son and I stayed the night up there in a tent last year. Jis tent we were checking it out - very cold but an incredible moon rise in the night sky.
Am considering HP Envy 14 = i7 720Q with Radeon mobility 5650 which gives novabench score of 840 - pretty good for a laptop - and only 14.5". However only has 5400 rpm 640G drive (would have preferred 7200) but not sure if speed really matters once hit those specs. Important thing for me was to get a reasonably small laptop for portability as i run home from work - plus carrying around school.
Thanks for all the help - had a good check at Novabench scores and think i'll go for fastest machine in smallest form - but not down to the 'stripped' processor which this thread started with.
Blessings
Gary
I never got there, but spent a few days in a mountain hut in the shadow of Mt Cook. Fantastic scenery, especially the snow drifts you could sometimes hear breaking off the steep face of the mountain (which is why most people climb from the other side, but it is where Ed Hillary did his training for Mt Everest).
You should be satisfied with that!
However only has 5400 rpm 640G drive (would have preferred 7200) but not sure if speed really matters once hit those specs.
Found a New Zealand review of Seagate's hybrid disk drive => http://www.geekzone.co.nz/lotech/7306 (noticeably faster)
Appears Aquilatech offers 500 GB hybrid drive => http://www.aquilatech.co.nz/productDetail.asp?idProduct=DR6B4
Logos 4 does read many resource files and indexes from disk - faster speed should be noticeable.
my benchmark score is 290. what does that tell me about my machine and running Logos4?
That you need to upgrade bad[:D]
