notebook with highest CPU?

[kensuguro]

I was looking around for a notebook with simply the most powerful mobile CPU around. Probably of the windows flavor.. I checked out lenovo and saw that they didn't have quads. Not sure.. maybe HP? Dell? Sony? Those seem sort of questionable to me, since I grew up thinking Thinkpads were the equivalent of tanks in the notebook world.

Any suggestions? Just fastest CPU. I need it for a native rig.

[siriusbliss]

Alienware...
ADK...

I'm also keeping an eye on these guys...
http://www.eurocom.com/

I would avoid off-the-shelf units (like Dells, etc.) unless you want to spend a lot of time turning off all the redundant crap that is loaded on those machines.


Greg

[valis]

I would skip Alienware and go to ADK or another custom audio builder if you can afford it. You'll be insured that the usually problem items like the wireless chipset/drivers will be vetted for IRQ/DPC latency issues (which seem more common under Vista & Win7 these days) and you won't be buying an overly hot GPU that you probably don't need.

[kensuguro]

ya, that's the thing... the strangely powerful ones are always gaming ones, which come with a bunch of stuff that I don't necessarily need, and costs about as much as a car. Will check out ADK, thnx.

[valis]

There are other audio makers with laptop offerings similar to ADK as well, I just referenced them as they were mentioned above me.

Also some of the 'gamer' laptops might have 'hybrid SLI' (or AMD's similar chipset) which would be ok if you don't mind the cost. The 'lesser' integrated GPU stays active until you run something demanding enough for the 'full' gaming card...I think that's a decent compromise if you can't find a quad otherwise. Just beware that many of the laptops that go for that sector may actually even be using desktop chips, which would be the other concern to eliminate. The heat from those isn't worth it at all imo...

[kensuguro]

So it seems like ADK and Rain recording.. sucks becuase both their quad models only come in 17' behemoth.. I had a 17' mac once, and those things were insanely huge.. like carrying around a framed painting in my bag..

and their smaller 15' models only come in regular core2duo, and I already have a core2duo 2.5ghz with 4g ram... don't think there's really a benefit other than maybe a quiet fan. ADK has texas instrument firewire chipset, but I don't even use firewire.

[valis]

Well that's probably due partially to the price premium (quads being pricier already put them in the top model) and maybe partially due to the extra power & cooling requirements (more room for battery & heatpipes.)

In the "there's always something better coming" way, Intel's next mobile platform Clarksfield is meant to be the quad core mobile chipset (it's based off of Nehelem but with mPGA packaging instead of the newer LGA.) It actually launches on the 23rd of this month, but much like our discussions of Lynnfield you're going to be best off waiting at least a month or so for the more severe bios & hardware problems to be resolved. Or grab one from a company that is dedicated to resolving the issues with you if you don't mind putting in the world on your end (maybe you'll have a favorable experience without having to resolve problems even!)

[dawman]

Brotha' Man Ken,
Are you using the PTeq 3.1 on a laptop..?
Many guys I know are using T9600 based laptops for gigging and are doing just fine.
2 of them are Lenovo's with 2 internal drives besides the SSD based system drive.
Using Cubase for a few backing tracks and Kontakt based instruments they are pulling doubles all over town. A lightweight 88 and a laptop, they use the crappy provided PA which is usually a junk mixer and 2 x JBL Eons.
I really like the power that the new Xeon L3426 uses and hope that CPU takes off. I would love to see the same design with 2.66GHz as that is plenty of power at that speed.
The MacPro's use 2 x i7 Xeon's @ 2.66 ( mid sized model ) and are running a huge amount of plugs and tracks.

[braincell]

You should build a custom mini desktop and have a travel case made for it. I don't see why notebooks are such a fad. Nobody uses the batteries and most of them are crap and you can't upgrade the graphics card or easily fix some things plus they cost way more.

[kensuguro]

well, desktops aren't a bad idea. The notebook's going to be used stationary anyway. My desktop broke down, and I switched to tracking stuff on the notebook which was sitting on top of my piano controller. (one I used to drive pianoteq) And it turns out that the workflow isn't bad at all. So, a notebook is cool since I can just put it on top of the keyboard, plus bring it along for gigs.

[valis]

Clarksfield is almost here now (Lynnfield in mobile format)

[cortone]

stardust,

And what was the point of your quote? Are you cricizing the reviewer's "state the obvious" skills (like it's a new concept that a laptop is harder to cool and more susceptible to heat-related issues!), or implying that the Clarksfield is running way too hot for a latop? Or something else?

Cory

[valis]

Well the actual wording in the article said something like "Think it through briefly, and Core i7’s move to the mobile market might not make too much sense - " and then the sentence he quotes finished that up. That was a reference to the well known thermal output / power draw of the i7 Bloomfield cpu's which are all rated at 130W TDP, and well covered by all tech sites for that. But that's only under max load and it's why turbo scales back as cores come online.

This mobile core is based off of Lynnfield which also just came out and has made headlines for cutting power usage and thermal output a LOT, even the top 860/870 are back down to being rated at 95W but under load most samples use a lot less than that (95W being the rated *upper cieling*). To get this even lower Clarksfield drops the Uncore speed down to 2.13Ghz like the i5 (lower end of Lynnfield) instead of 2.4Ghz, and uses lower overall clock speed as well to cut overall TDW to 45W.

What remains to be seen is how it performs for audio with all 4 cores loaded, but even the current dual core Core2 series notebooks (using the MOBILE version of the chip) are known for getting warm (typical versions are rated at 35W and under load tend to run very close to that) so if you're after performance then I foresee little difference there (could be wrong though...) Core2Quad in a laptop would be far worse imo...the Core2Quad mobile & Core2Extreme mobile chips are rated at 45W and run very close to that under load.

I'm sorely in need of a new laptop and Core2 is getting long in the tooth, but if Clarksfield doesn't pan out for me it's going to be a bit of a wait for the 32nm mobile chips...

[cortone]

valis,

Here's the full quote:

Think it through briefly, and Core i7’s move to the mobile market might not make too much sense - indeed, combine huge power draw with massive heat output and you’ve pretty much nailed the absolute worst combination for the slimline confines of a laptop chassis.

However, Core i7 is a better match than anyone might have imagined. Several of its key features even seem to make more sense in a laptop than they do in a desktop PC, with Turbo Boost in particular making the perfect mobile match.

I get the sense that he's fully impressed. I hope to be too, I'm in need of a new laptop as well, and can't wait for the next gen.

Cheers,
Cory

[valis]

Yes I had read the article, but thanks for the full quote it's probably more clear than my extended blather for most. Self-edit? Never!

I did also get the impression from him and a few 'sneak peak' posts elsewhere that this was going to be a good mobile chipset, hence my keeping an eye for Lynnfield/Clarksfield elsewhere in these forums. One thing you'll notice he stresses there is that the TURBO scaling works very well for the way typical users work, 1 task typically needing priority for you to work or enjoy video and the rest getting out of the way a bit as it would be underutilized at full speed anyway.

So that makes me curious about how the 45W TDP envelope affects the scaling of those cores from 1 in turbo to all 4 going in lower speeds (coming out of turbo progressively as cores come online) -- specifically with modern Audio applications. After that it's just a question of what issues the chipsets might have (hopefully none major) and what boneheaded configurations different makers come up with (and avoiding those).

On the last note I'm eyeballing a Macbook Pro because I'm silly enough to remain tethered to Logic, and want something that can double up for Live use. for Ableton Live alone I would certainly get off much cheaper elsewhere and I'd be sure to have the expresscard slot that I'm hoping Apple brings back for the smaller than 17" models...

[valis]

Yes I understood your sentiments fine

However I know quite a few people using Core2 era laptops fine as well, and speedstepping is largely dependant on driver & vendor support (as you've said.) I'm not in such a hurry that I'll be buying something hot off of the line, wiating for a product to mature is where I am usually at (December/January was my expectation.) Thanks for your input nonetheless!

[cortone]

Sorry Valis, the quote was more for stardust than you, that wasn't clear from my post. I understood that you were reading the reviewer's surprise correctly.

stardust, I provided the rest of the quote because you missed his point. He is saying that, if you don't think it through, this would seem to be total overkill, but in fact it works surprisingly well, and beyond his expectations. Your quote did not provide the context of his statement.

This is not SpeedStep, but several generations past. And using Dell as a reference is a pretty small statistical sample, especially since they aren't really known for their R&D efforts and rock-solid implementation. They make boxes for the masses. Their boxes work pretty well for the masses. We by definition are not "the masses" given our usage requirements.

There are two excellent reasons why someone would consider a laptop over a desktop (which would have the same or greater TDP, btw, just better spacing and heat evacuation): footprint (as in Ken's case) and portability (a heavy laptop is still much more portable than a desktop). No problem that those aren't important considerations for you, they are for many other users.

Suggesting that there is only 2 hours of battery life for these is a false argument. For the vast majority of the computing tasks, the battery life is much longer. I really don't know anybody who would try to run a DAW laptop without a power cable even if they could (PZers, are you out there? JimmyV our live-performing guru?), and if they had to in an emergency, two hours sounds like a pretty long set to me!

But Valis is right: for our specific, niche usage model, we won't know until it has been tested with audio applications. There is still a huge gap in s/w fully using h/w capabilities for most audio apps. I'm hoping that it will work well! But I won't be terribly surprised if there are some minor challenges in creating a full-blown DAW laptop that can run 12 VSTis and simultaneously lay down 16 tracks without a glitch. In a couple of years, the same struggling laptop may be fine as software catches up.

Braincell makes a good point about creating a more portable desktop for Ken's specific needs, but it won't provide the same footprint or flexibility. A destop might work well (and be cheaper) in that situation if Ken decides he doesn't care about the workflow that he is currently using.

Cory

[dawman]

Battery life on the Mac is 8 hours these days.
I would use batteries on the flights where it usually would last a cross country trip.
Laptops were made that, besides when not connected I have witnessed flucuations in current draw which is totally unacceptable.
I use to program a battery operated sequencer with the AMW synth set on the plane and had tons of fun. Reading is boring after doing something like that.
Using a notebook can be done. I had a Lenovo over the Christmas Holidays last year and it worked so well I sold it to the Bassist.
We were using 34mm connectors for external 2.5" Raptors, while the O.S. + Apps drive was an Intel X25 that never was a problem.
I think the HDD's would be the biggest source of trouble.
Streaming HDD's w/ Kontakt or GVI is a serious workout and the heat would be a problem IMHO. CPU would be the last thing to worry about, unless you are using an Prescott of yore.

[Neutron]

I think you accidentally spelled "Apple says Battery life on the Mac is 8 hours these days" as "Battery life on the Mac is 8 hours these days"

[cortone]

No offense taken stardust, you were just posting an out-of-context quote and I was providing the context. The reviewer actually pointed to his impression that this set up actually accomplishes the "compromise" successfully, and that it is overcoming the heat/power limitations of a laptop. He's not doing audio, so you and I can only extrapolate to our usage based on this. I'm optimistic, you're convinced it's unfeasible. I'll change my opinion if proven wrong with data.

You can afford multiple desktops and a laptop or disk set up to move data between places, which is awesome. Some need to be more stream-lined, whether for ease or economics.

Regarding the footprint, the type of laptop we are discussing doesn't require all of the add-ins you reference, aside from the mouse. They are built-in. A high-capacity battery is internal, although that may be why you would feel you need an external DVD as opposed to the internal one. Docking stations don't double a footprint. Also, in a DAW scenario, I'm still unclear why you feel you wouldn't plug it in, especially since all of the other DAW-related peripherals (midi controllers, pre-amps, amps, etc.) will need power, but I'd prefer to let that pass. I will point out that KenSuguro found the small footprint useful in his initial post.

Any laptop is going to require some attention to power, but your list of battery life is highly debatable, since you clearly don't own one from this generation and can't speak from experience. Listening to MP3 and browsing are not intensive applications, and won't require Turbo mode to engage, which is the huge power draw that you fear. Running a synth *might*, we don't know yet. I suspect it will still net you well-over 3 hours. That's a pretty good stretch of creativity in those rare occasions when I can't actually plug the thing in.

Regarding mobility, I have clearly acknowledged that there are a variety of options. You cannot tell me that 8 pounds of power-user laptop isn't easier to mobilize than 20 pounds of mini desktop with monitor, keys, and mouse which cannot under any circumstances run without wall power. You won't be using that set up for anything on your bus-ride to the next studio. You sure could with the laptop though.

I'm pretty sure JV would love to have a laptop set up to replace his 4U box. To his credit he's open-minded enough to keep evaluating.

My apologies to you stardust, I have clearly touched a sore spot for you. You are of course more than right for your usage needs, and I would be wrong to tell you that my opinions are better for you. I didn't intend to do so, I just wanted other readers to have proper information in order to make a choice that fits *their* needs, which are almost certainly different from mine and yours.

In all respects, anyone who can wait, *should* wait another generation for 32nm processors, with the corresponding electrical power reductions and processing power increases. If one can't wait, there are some choices that must be made. Hopefully they will find some use in our opposing opinions to make those choices.

Cheers and may the last word be yours,
Cory