http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/ Engadget Comments for HP tossing Penryn into latest Pavilions http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/

Is it because it is just after the shopping season - or is there another suprise around the corner???


Strange PR strategy! (or lack thereof)]]>Jan 27th 2008 9:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 27th 2008 11:29AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/That's a stupid idea. Quad core = 2X the power consumption of a dual core. On a laptop, that's pretty damn important. There's really no reason to get that either: I've had a Core 2 Duo e6600 for the past 1.5 years and I haven't had anything lag on it. Just buy the damn T9300 and be done with it. Otherwise you'll get a batterylife of like 2 hours.]]>Jan 27th 2008 11:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/
i think hes joking]]>Jan 27th 2008 1:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 27th 2008 10:03AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 27th 2008 10:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/
The 10% improvement of Penryn is a clock-for-clock comparison. The T9300 is .3GHz faster than the T7500...so its much faster and cooler. Altogether it's worth the extra $100 that HP charges.]]>Jan 27th 2008 10:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/

Au revoir...]]>Jan 27th 2008 10:55AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 27th 2008 11:20AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/
The price for the Penryn T9300 is around ~$350...and the Merom T7500 is ~$260.

So the $100 price delta isn't that far off.]]>Jan 27th 2008 11:22AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 27th 2008 10:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/HP is charging an extra $100 for the 45nm 2.5GHz Penryn that Intel is selling at the exact same pricepoint as the 65nm 2.2GHz Santa Rosa. Unless HP has discounted the Santa Rosa chips—which I don't see—it seems they are charging a premium for chips they are getting for the same price.


$209
— T7100 "Santa Rosa" (1.80 GHz, 2 MB L2 Cache, 800MHz FSB, 65nm)
— T8100 "Penryn" (2.10 GHz, 3 MB L2 Cache, 800MHz FSB, 45nm)

$241
— T7300 "Santa Rosa" (2.00 GHz, 4 MB L2 Cache, 800MHz FSB, 65nm)
— T8300 "Penryn" (2.40 GHz, 3 MB L2 Cache, 800MHz FSB, 45nm)

$316
— T7500 "Santa Rosa" (2.20 GHz, 4 MB L2 Cache, 800MHz FSB, 65nm)
— T9300 "Penryn" (2.50 GHz, 6 MB L2 Cache, 800MHz FSB, 45nm)

$530
— T7700 "Santa Rosa" (2.40 GHz, 4 MB L2 Cache, 800MHz FSB, 65nm)
— T9500 "Penryn" (2.60 GHz, 6 MB L2 Cache, 800MHz FSB, 45nm)

]]>Jan 27th 2008 11:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 27th 2008 11:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 27th 2008 12:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/That is wrong in so many ways. Prices get lower for the same GHz chips.

@ mattclarkie,
These new chips are more efficient that Intel can increase the clock speed and still offer power savings over the previous gen chip at the same pricepoint. Certainly, if power savings is more important than clockspeed then you could go from, say, a 2.0GHz Santa Rosa to the cheaper 2.10GHz Penryn instead of to the 2.4GHz Penryn. You wouldn't lose performance and once SSE4 optimized apps come around would gain some performance, but you would certainly gain a very nice increase in battery usage.

I look forward to the in-depth comparisons that should be showing up in February.]]>Jan 27th 2008 12:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/

Au revoir...]]>Jan 27th 2008 2:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 27th 2008 11:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/
It never pays to wait months for something, because everything is replaced with a few months anyway. If I had bought my new Laptop when I wanted 1 year ago I could have justified an upgrade to Penryn.

I expect that Intel are working on getting that Quad down-sized for Mobile use, and I highly expect to see it sometime May to July this year. That may explain why Penryn is on the back-burner.]]>Jan 27th 2008 12:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/
In 4 months—maybe 6 as Intel is slowing down releases slightly due to AMD lack of competition—we'll see 32nm chips with a new socket and other new and improved features. These chips will be a significant increase over Penryn.

If I was debating on getting a new machine and could wait 6 months I would wait for these new 32nm chips. Especially because I don't think it'll be until then that SSE4 optimized apps will be appearing.]]>Jan 27th 2008 12:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 27th 2008 12:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 27th 2008 12:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/

scott w
www.growthportfolio.ning.com
"the facebook of technology and investing"]]>Jan 27th 2008 1:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 27th 2008 3:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/
Yes! And my pocketbook, btw, hates you.

Most PC manufacturers adopt the latest and greatest as soon as they can. It's assumed tier 1 companies will. So I'm not too sure that they always or mostly make a big deal out of the technology. ]]>Jan 27th 2008 4:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/27/hp-tossing-penryn-into-latest-pavilions/Jan 28th 2008 1:49AM