How to pick the CPU for your new notebook
After saving and scrimping for months, you finally have enough money saved to get your new notebook. Now you have to make some decisions, like what processor to select for your new system.
There are a number of CPU (Central Processing Unit) options to consider when purchasing a new notebook. The CPU is the heart of the system and the price range of the options is large enough that this can be a critical consideration in determining what notebook you buy. It is not odd to see a difference of $500 or more between the least and most expensive processors in a manufacturer’s notebook lineup.
First, perhaps a definition is in order. The Central Processing Unit (CPU) or processor is the primary chip (actually chipset, usually) within a computer system that carries out the instructions of a computer program. It is the component which drives the computer’s functions; the fundamental operation of most CPUs, regardless of manufacturer or form, is to execute a sequence of stored instructions that make up the programs that you run on your system.
There are two main manufacturers of the CPU chips that are used in personal computers, Intel and AMD. Intel practically invented the computer chip, and is far and away the leader in the field. AMD had also been around for a long time, but has always lagged significantly behind Intel in sales. Both manufacturers sell a wide variety of CPUs, some of which are specifically designed and built for use in portable computers.
The three most important considerations in laptop chipsets design are size, energy consumption, and heat production. In many ways, these three considerations are linked from an engineering standpoint, and are additionally tied to CPU speed, which is generally measured in gigahertz (GHz). Faster, of course, is better but the faster the clock speed of a CPU, the more heat it tends to generate, all other things being equal. Also generally speaking, the more electricity that is used by a CPU, the more heat it generates. These issues are important because heat is the biggest enemy of a CPU, and can significantly shorten component life. In addition, of course, a more power-hungry CPU will run down your laptop battery faster than a miserly user of power. Finally, CPUs with smaller form factors help manufacturers to build notebooks that are sleeker and slimmer, an important selection factor for many consumers.
Processors can also be divided into two groups another way: by the number of “cores” that are built into the chipset; CPUs have historically had a single core, but in recent years multiple cores in a single CPU have become common. A core is the basic component of a CPU chipset, the part which actually processes the memory instructions that make up whatever program(s) your computer is running. It is possible to build more than one core into a CPU: a dual-core has two cores, a quad-core has four cores, etc. There are a number of implementations of multi-core processors, some of which are more efficient than others, but as a general rule a multi-core processor is faster than a single core, and is also likely to consume more energy and produce more heat.
A short look across part of the Intel line of processors will illustrate the availability of dual and multi-core processors. The current Intel single-core processors is the Atom and one of the Centrino line of CPUs. The Atom is a ultra-low-voltage processor, designed specifically for portable devices such as laptops; it is currently powering a sizable percentage of the netbook computers available. The single core Centrino has been around for a number of years, and is still available in a single-core version, primarily used to power less expensive full-sized laptops.
Newer processors by Intel include the Core I7 series, available in dual-core and quad-core, with an eight-core processor planned for the near future. Prices range from under $50 for a single core Atom or Centrino to almost $4,000 for the most expensive multi-core, though few consumers would buy the processors at the very top of that range. These same sorts of differences are true of the AMD line of processors as well.
As always, selecting computer hardware is a series of tradeoffs. That is as true of CPUs as it is of laser printers and scanners. And just like with those peripheral items, a great deal of your decision will have to be based on your uses for your laptop. If you are an inveterate and serious gamer, your needs will be different than if you are a more basic user of email and the internet.
The general rule of thumb with computer hardware is to buy as much power and quality as you can afford, to which I always add a caveat: as long as none of it is likely to go to waste. If you are going to run games, heavy-duty graphics programs, and other processor-intensive applications you need to opt for a notebook with a faster processor and probably one that is of the dual-core variety so that you can share your heavier processing load across cores. If you are a more typical user, content with word processing, simple spreadsheets, email, and a little net surfing, a single-core processor will probably handle your needs.
As for clock speed within single- or multi-core processor groups, not many of us need the fastest or even the next fastest CPU, which always comes at a considerable premium and can quickly run up the price of your new laptop. Worse, buying too many cores and too much speed when you don’t really need it will result in the consumption of more power, the production of more heat, and the more rapid draining of your battery.
So, when you’re looking at laptops and trying to decide among the many available CPUs, remember that you should buy all the power and speed that you really need, but going all out on the processor may be a significant waste of money unless you are a hardcore gamer or 3D modeler. Today, a single processor in the 2 to 2.5 GHz range should be enough for the basic low-end user, unless you run processor-intensive applications, as should middle of the range processor cache specs. For gamers and heavy graphics users, something in the 3 GHz range with more processor cache would be a good idea. And by all means, either way, don’t scrimp on memory, which is always an excellent performance enhancer, but that is a story for another day.
