Thanks for the info on Nero. I saw another post in this forum about it not working, but glad to hear it is. I've got a copy lying around somewhere so will try it out.
I see in your sig that you have a D800 and i9100. I've just sold my i8500 (handing it over on Monday, thus the reason for monster backups) and will order an i9100 then. So, how big is it? Far too big to be comfortable, or acceptable due to far better performance and features? I'm just not sure if it's a decision I'll regret. I'd really like the faster RAM and CPU, but don't know if it makes that much of a difference that I can live with the extra size and weight.
You mention 1mb cache in your sig. Are you sure that's right? I know the 90nm processors have a 1mb cache, but I thought the 9100 uses the slightly older 130nm processors which have the 512K cache. If you are sure, did you have to order the 1mb cache specially, or did you just choose a default system?
i think your math is ok, its just that ez cd creator totally SUXXS....
i used to use it, and used to have many problems, not the least of which was the evil cd creator messing up big time by burning a coaster and then DELETING THE FILES IT TRIED TO BURN WITHOUT ASKING ME ~_~
i dont know why it comes bundled with dell computers, as i wouldnt wish this horrible software on my worst enemy (maybe i would actually...), but if you can get a copy of nero burning rom, you should be ok... the cd burning engine in nero is VASTLY superior to the roxio krapp, in features, speed, stability, and compatibility - i personally think its easier too (or more logical at least) and with the wizard, anyone can use it ....
anyway, with nero i have never had ANY problems burning cd's or dvd's (audio cd's, vcd's, and movie dvd's too) to the full capacity, even overburning over maximum capacity occasionally with no problems yet (fingers crossed :p)...
i think the problem is definitely with the software...
on my bios it shows a 1mb cache, though if i do remember correctly, when i purchased it, i think it did state that it was supposed to have 512kb - i guess either im lucky i got a prescott (the pentium 4 / 540 is intel's new name for the 3.2ghz p4), or maybe its standard now.... actually it may be that the p4 2.8 ghz and below have 512kb cache and ones above 3.0 ghz have 1mb... not too sure really :p
as for the size, yeah this 9100 is quite a monster - picture the d800 or i8600 with a 1" thick black docking bay glued underneath it, then add another 1.5 - 2 lbs to the weight... however, this dosent really matter to me, as i use it as a desktop replacement computer anyway ...
i still prefer the way the d800 looks and handles, however the performance jump from a 1.6 ghz pentuim-m (roughly 2.4ghz p4) to an 800mhz FSB 3.2ghz p4 with hyperthreading (not to mention the killer m11 video card) is totally noticable, especially when multitasking or running games...
i guess my bottom line would be, if you plan on taking this laptop places more than infrequently, then get an i8600 with the m10(mobility 9600), as the size, weight and battery life to performace is pretty amazing, and the bulkiness of the 9100 kinda makes it a drag to lug around with you (not to mention the power adapter for the 9100 is literally the size and weight of a BRICK)...
when it comes down to the d800/i8600's performance with a 2.0ghz pentium-m, its comparable to a mobile 3.0 ghz p4 with a slower bus speed and slightly higher latency (a trade off with better battery life), but the desktop 3.2ghz prescott (and you can get a 3.4 ghz extreme edition with 2mb cache if you want) with an i765 chipset @ 800mhz FSB and dual-channel 400mhz ram is the fastest youre going to get on a "laptop" if you can call the 9100 that....
to give you a performance comparison, ive found that the pentium-m (on my d800) is blazing fast with a single or like max 2-3 apps simultaneously, but the latency introduced by the slower bus/memory speeds and the power saving features (in the architecture of the chip, NOT speedstep) make it fairly sluggish when i have say 7 or so IE windows open, with photoshop, quark, word, nero, some p2p downloading and a movie playing (and thats with 1gb of memory!) - which pretty much maxes out my 1.6ghz d800's processor...
on the other hand, when i have all of this open on my 9100, the hyperthreading keeps things pretty smooth all around (like when switching between windows its pretty instant, whereas on the d800 it would take a second or 2 to switch)... the system and processor, with like 7 IE windows, 3 or more graphics apps, nero burning a dvd, bittorent p2p downloading, itunes playing on an external soundcard, and bsplayer playing a divx movie on an external monitor with the internal soundcard, barely hits 50% (except when applying a filter in pshop) - ya gotta love hyperthreading :D
No, thanks very much for the long post. It sounds like the 9100 is what I'm after. I cart my 8500 between home and work each day and would be doing the same with the 9100. A 2nd power adapter at work means that I at least loose that weight. I always figure that the time may come when I need to take it to a customer site but it's probably so infrequent that I can live with the pain (and embarassment of pulling out a near-desktop size machine).
Glock21
229 Posts
0
July 29th, 2004 17:00
smr
64 Posts
0
July 30th, 2004 03:00
Hi blaxo,
Thanks for the info on Nero. I saw another post in this forum about it not working, but glad to hear it is. I've got a copy lying around somewhere so will try it out.
I see in your sig that you have a D800 and i9100. I've just sold my i8500 (handing it over on Monday, thus the reason for monster backups) and will order an i9100 then. So, how big is it? Far too big to be comfortable, or acceptable due to far better performance and features? I'm just not sure if it's a decision I'll regret. I'd really like the faster RAM and CPU, but don't know if it makes that much of a difference that I can live with the extra size and weight.
You mention 1mb cache in your sig. Are you sure that's right? I know the 90nm processors have a 1mb cache, but I thought the 9100 uses the slightly older 130nm processors which have the 512K cache. If you are sure, did you have to order the 1mb cache specially, or did you just choose a default system?
Regards,
Steven
blaxo
21 Posts
0
July 30th, 2004 03:00
i think your math is ok, its just that ez cd creator totally SUXXS....
i used to use it, and used to have many problems, not the least of which was the evil cd creator messing up big time by burning a coaster and then DELETING THE FILES IT TRIED TO BURN WITHOUT ASKING ME ~_~
i dont know why it comes bundled with dell computers, as i wouldnt wish this horrible software on my worst enemy (maybe i would actually...), but if you can get a copy of nero burning rom, you should be ok... the cd burning engine in nero is VASTLY superior to the roxio krapp, in features, speed, stability, and compatibility - i personally think its easier too (or more logical at least) and with the wizard, anyone can use it ....
anyway, with nero i have never had ANY problems burning cd's or dvd's (audio cd's, vcd's, and movie dvd's too) to the full capacity, even overburning over maximum capacity occasionally with no problems yet (fingers crossed :p)...
i think the problem is definitely with the software...
you can get a demo of nero here - http://www.nero.com/en/nero-prog.php
good luck
blaxo
21 Posts
0
July 31st, 2004 07:00
on my bios it shows a 1mb cache, though if i do remember correctly, when i purchased it, i think it did state that it was supposed to have 512kb - i guess either im lucky i got a prescott (the pentium 4 / 540 is intel's new name for the 3.2ghz p4), or maybe its standard now.... actually it may be that the p4 2.8 ghz and below have 512kb cache and ones above 3.0 ghz have 1mb... not too sure really :p
as for the size, yeah this 9100 is quite a monster - picture the d800 or i8600 with a 1" thick black docking bay glued underneath it, then add another 1.5 - 2 lbs to the weight... however, this dosent really matter to me, as i use it as a desktop replacement computer anyway ...
i still prefer the way the d800 looks and handles, however the performance jump from a 1.6 ghz pentuim-m (roughly 2.4ghz p4) to an 800mhz FSB 3.2ghz p4 with hyperthreading (not to mention the killer m11 video card) is totally noticable, especially when multitasking or running games...
i guess my bottom line would be, if you plan on taking this laptop places more than infrequently, then get an i8600 with the m10(mobility 9600), as the size, weight and battery life to performace is pretty amazing, and the bulkiness of the 9100 kinda makes it a drag to lug around with you (not to mention the power adapter for the 9100 is literally the size and weight of a BRICK)...
when it comes down to the d800/i8600's performance with a 2.0ghz pentium-m, its comparable to a mobile 3.0 ghz p4 with a slower bus speed and slightly higher latency (a trade off with better battery life), but the desktop 3.2ghz prescott (and you can get a 3.4 ghz extreme edition with 2mb cache if you want) with an i765 chipset @ 800mhz FSB and dual-channel 400mhz ram is the fastest youre going to get on a "laptop" if you can call the 9100 that....
to give you a performance comparison, ive found that the pentium-m (on my d800) is blazing fast with a single or like max 2-3 apps simultaneously, but the latency introduced by the slower bus/memory speeds and the power saving features (in the architecture of the chip, NOT speedstep) make it fairly sluggish when i have say 7 or so IE windows open, with photoshop, quark, word, nero, some p2p downloading and a movie playing (and thats with 1gb of memory!) - which pretty much maxes out my 1.6ghz d800's processor...
on the other hand, when i have all of this open on my 9100, the hyperthreading keeps things pretty smooth all around (like when switching between windows its pretty instant, whereas on the d800 it would take a second or 2 to switch)... the system and processor, with like 7 IE windows, 3 or more graphics apps, nero burning a dvd, bittorent p2p downloading, itunes playing on an external soundcard, and bsplayer playing a divx movie on an external monitor with the internal soundcard, barely hits 50% (except when applying a filter in pshop) - ya gotta love hyperthreading :D
sorry bout the long post, but i hope this helps:)
smr
64 Posts
0
July 31st, 2004 13:00
No, thanks very much for the long post. It sounds like the 9100 is what I'm after. I cart my 8500 between home and work each day and would be doing the same with the 9100. A 2nd power adapter at work means that I at least loose that weight. I always figure that the time may come when I need to take it to a customer site but it's probably so infrequent that I can live with the pain (and embarassment of pulling out a near-desktop size machine).
Regards,
Steven