What is my real CPU?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Truongs
  • Start date Start date
T

Truongs

Hi All.

I just bought a Sony Vaio Notebook VGN-FE880E. Under System my CPU is shown
as Intel Core 2 CPU T5500 @1.66 GHz. But, under Device Manager, it's shown
as Intel Core 2 CPU T7600 @2.33 GHz (twice). Which one is my correct CPU?
Your assistance will be very much appreciated.
 
Truongs said:
Hi All.

I just bought a Sony Vaio Notebook VGN-FE880E. Under System my CPU is shown
as Intel Core 2 CPU T5500 @1.66 GHz. But, under Device Manager, it's shown
as Intel Core 2 CPU T7600 @2.33 GHz (twice). Which one is my correct CPU?
Your assistance will be very much appreciated.
Click to expand...

One distinguishing difference I can see, is the T5500 has 2MB of
L2 cache, while the T7600 has 4MB of cache. So that should help
distinguish the difference.

http://processorfinder.intel.com/List.aspx?ProcFam=2643

The "CPUZ" utility can give some info. Download is on the upper left
of the page.

http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php

The problem is, other than the difference in cache, a lot of the
reporting features will report similar info for the two processors.
I think they have the same family code. The processors likely
have EIST (speedstep), meaning that the core multiplier changes
as a function of measured CPU load. To keep the processors busy,
you can run a loading application. This is an example of an
application that will make the processors very busy, and keep
them running at the top multiplier. This program, runs the Prime95
torture test, on both cores at the same time. The first link is the
file to download.

http://sp2004.fre3.com/beta/orthos_exe_20060420.cab (file to download)
http://sp2004.fre3.com/beta/beta2.htm (the download page)
http://sp2004.fre3.com/ (Stress Prime 2004 main page)

Other than that, Intel has a processor identification utility,
but when I look at the output, I don't really think the Intel
utility will do a better job than CPUZ. I don't think any program
can give an unambiguous SSPEC (SLxxx code). You can see examples
of the SLxxx code, on the first link I gave above.

HTH,
Paul
 
Paul, I appreciate your enlightenment.

Truongs


Paul wrote:
: Truongs wrote:
:: Hi All.
::
:: I just bought a Sony Vaio Notebook VGN-FE880E. Under System my CPU
:: is shown as Intel Core 2 CPU T5500 @1.66 GHz. But, under Device
:: Manager, it's shown as Intel Core 2 CPU T7600 @2.33 GHz (twice).
:: Which one is my correct CPU? Your assistance will be very much
:: appreciated.
::
::
:
: One distinguishing difference I can see, is the T5500 has 2MB of
: L2 cache, while the T7600 has 4MB of cache. So that should help
: distinguish the difference.
:
: http://processorfinder.intel.com/List.aspx?ProcFam=2643
:
: The "CPUZ" utility can give some info. Download is on the upper left
: of the page.
:
: http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php
:
: The problem is, other than the difference in cache, a lot of the
: reporting features will report similar info for the two processors.
: I think they have the same family code. The processors likely
: have EIST (speedstep), meaning that the core multiplier changes
: as a function of measured CPU load. To keep the processors busy,
: you can run a loading application. This is an example of an
: application that will make the processors very busy, and keep
: them running at the top multiplier. This program, runs the Prime95
: torture test, on both cores at the same time. The first link is the
: file to download.
:
: http://sp2004.fre3.com/beta/orthos_exe_20060420.cab (file to
: download) http://sp2004.fre3.com/beta/beta2.htm (the download page)
: http://sp2004.fre3.com/ (Stress Prime 2004 main page)
:
: Other than that, Intel has a processor identification utility,
: but when I look at the output, I don't really think the Intel
: utility will do a better job than CPUZ. I don't think any program
: can give an unambiguous SSPEC (SLxxx code). You can see examples
: of the SLxxx code, on the first link I gave above.
:
: HTH,
: Paul
 
Truongs said:
Hi All.

I just bought a Sony Vaio Notebook VGN-FE880E. Under System my CPU is
shown
as Intel Core 2 CPU T5500 @1.66 GHz. But, under Device Manager, it's shown
as Intel Core 2 CPU T7600 @2.33 GHz (twice). Which one is my correct CPU?
Your assistance will be very much appreciated.
Click to expand...

what was it described as by the seller........
 
Hi,

Thanks for looking into my question. I downloaded CPU-Z as recommended by
Paul and it showed Intel Core 2 Dual T5500 @1.66 GHz with 2 MB of L2 Cache
as advertised by Sony. But I'm curious why the Device Manager showed
different version.

Regards.


:
: What does the BIOS report?
:
: Pet Parker wrote:
: >
: > : > > Hi All.
: > >
: > > I just bought a Sony Vaio Notebook VGN-FE880E. Under System my CPU is
: > > shown
: > > as Intel Core 2 CPU T5500 @1.66 GHz. But, under Device Manager, it's
shown
: > > as Intel Core 2 CPU T7600 @2.33 GHz (twice). Which one is my correct
CPU?
: > > Your assistance will be very much appreciated.
: > >
: > >
: >
: > what was it described as by the seller........
:
: --
: Mike Walsh
: West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S.A.
 
Truongs wrote: ** and top-posted - fixed **
Thanks for looking into my question. I downloaded CPU-Z as
recommended by Paul and it showed Intel Core 2 Dual T5500 @1.66
GHz with 2 MB of L2 Cache as advertised by Sony. But I'm curious
why the Device Manager showed different version.
Click to expand...

I fixed the top-posting and the 'wrong' quote marker. Left the
content, less sigs. Now consider which is more readable.

Please do not top-post. Your answer belongs after (or intermixed
with) the quoted material to which you reply, after snipping all
irrelevant material. See the following links:

--
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
<http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html>
<http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html>
<http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> (taming google)
<http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/> (newusers)
 
Get a f'ing life, will you?

CBFalconer said:
Truongs wrote: ** and top-posted - fixed **

I fixed the top-posting and the 'wrong' quote marker. Left the
content, less sigs. Now consider which is more readable.

Please do not top-post. Your answer belongs after (or intermixed
with) the quoted material to which you reply, after snipping all
irrelevant material. See the following links:

--
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
<http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html>
<http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html>
<http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> (taming google)
<http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/> (newusers)
Click to expand...
 
CBFalconer said:
Noozer wrote: ** and top-posted - fixed **
Click to expand...

Don't **** with my posts. My comment belonged EXACTLY where I put it. It
wasn't a reply to anything in that post.
... snip ...
Why do you interfere? Truongs appears to be a new user, and needs
to be advised of the proper usage on Usenet. Meanwhile, you would
also be well advised to read the links I posted, and learn to snip
(at least sigs) and to bottom post.
Click to expand...

Bottom posting is WRONG.

All posts should be made, in context WITHIN the original post.

Maybe YOU should figure out that a sig of more that TWO lines is ALSO a
no-no on usenet, eh?
 
Don't **** with my posts. My comment belonged EXACTLY where I put it. It
wasn't a reply to anything in that post.
Click to expand...

Then you were replying to the wrong person and/or should
have snipped out some of the content.


Bottom posting is WRONG.
Click to expand...

In a group that uses the top-posting convention, yes.
In a group that uses bottom-posting (most groups) no.
Even in web forums, the BB * code* automatically formats
replies using the "
or [Q] codes before the reply so
it's bottom posting, because it is supposed to be bottom
posted if there is any prior content remaining. On usenet
participants are expected to realize this since the vast
majority do, it is obviously the convention seen on other's
postings.

It is a usenet convention that only a few groups choose to,
as a whole/ all-or-nothing, deviate from. This is not one
of those groups. When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

All posts should be made, in context WITHIN the original post.
Click to expand...

Yes, and since we read from the top of a page to the bottom
as an English convention, prior text is posted before the
added text to retain the context. The reply is always
interspersed or after but never before other text since the
text would have been snipped if non-contextual to the reply.
Click to expand...
 
Yeah, but think of it like this. If you bottom post, someone cruising
through the thread has to read the same drivel over and over before reaching
your well thought out opinion.

You might counter by suggesting the use of snippage - but as someone who
once got paid to write, I can tell you, snipping is a __very__ delicate
operation. Slip when you snip and the snippee screams foul at the top of
his/her lungs. In fact, if I were braver, or just more primitive, I would
have killed an editor I once had......

Thus one cruising thru the thread must also judge the quality of snippage -
way too much work for usenet.

And I have seen folks on usenet snip to avoid a point/argument in the
previous post - so perhaps one should have to post a bond or get a license
before one is allowed to perform that sensitive operation.

:)))

Mike

kony said:
fixed
** in message news:[email protected]...

Don't **** with my posts. My comment belonged EXACTLY where I put it. It
wasn't a reply to anything in that post.
Click to expand...

Then you were replying to the wrong person and/or should
have snipped out some of the content.


Bottom posting is WRONG.
Click to expand...

In a group that uses the top-posting convention, yes.
In a group that uses bottom-posting (most groups) no.
Even in web forums, the BB * code* automatically formats
replies using the "
or [Q] codes before the reply so
it's bottom posting, because it is supposed to be bottom
posted if there is any prior content remaining. On usenet
participants are expected to realize this since the vast
majority do, it is obviously the convention seen on other's
postings.

It is a usenet convention that only a few groups choose to,
as a whole/ all-or-nothing, deviate from. This is not one
of those groups. When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

All posts should be made, in context WITHIN the original post.
Click to expand...

Yes, and since we read from the top of a page to the bottom
as an English convention, prior text is posted before the
added text to retain the context. The reply is always
interspersed or after but never before other text since the
text would have been snipped if non-contextual to the reply.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Yeah, but think of it like this.
Click to expand...

There's no "think of it like this". The proper form was
explained so at this point you're just inable to learn
anything. There is nothing you could post that changes
this.
 
inable.............hmmmm

what about spelling/grammar are you gonna rep us on that to.
 
inable.............hmmmm

what about spelling/grammar are you gonna rep us on that to.
Click to expand...


If you can't discriminate the difference between occasional
spelling or typos and deliberate choices in posting style,
perhaps you'd be better off refraining from comment?
 
whi...........opps why.


kony said:
If you can't discriminate the difference between occasional
spelling or typos and deliberate choices in posting style,
perhaps you'd be better off refraining from comment?
Click to expand...
 
MF said:
Yeah, but think of it like this. If you bottom post, someone cruising
through the thread has to read the same drivel over and over before
reaching your well thought out opinion.
Click to expand...

As a rule of thumb, those who are too lazy to snip content which is not
relevent to what they are replying to are not worth the time to read.
Hence, after a screen or two of "the same drivel", it is on to the next
message (in most cases).

Jon
 
kony said:
There's no "think of it like this". The proper form was
explained so at this point you're just inable to learn
anything. There is nothing you could post that changes
this.
Click to expand...

Well, what I said in the post that _you improperly snipped_ was a joke.

But, dolt, there is _always_ "think of it like this."

In every instance in every situation in human history. Do you in your
ultimate triviality think that Usenet transcends that? Do you think that
your stupid adolescent strictures transcend that?

On a lighter note, anyone that can't handle a mix of bottom/inline/top
posting has very serious problems of anal retentiveness. What we might in
ordinary language call obsessive-compulsive rigidity. And someone who
corrects everyone who top posts, and someone who usually reinforces that
correction should clearly seek at least semi-professional help. You might
start by saying "I AM A USENET MAVEN AND EVERYONE MUST DO WHAT I SAY, please
help me, Doctor, I can't stop saying that."
 
It is totally unnecessary to cope with mixed top/bottom posting or
top-posting in general. The objective is clear - snip and
bottom/inline post.
Click to expand...

Funny, but that is EXACTLY what you are doing.
 
Well, what I said in the post that _you improperly snipped_ was a joke.

But, dolt, there is _always_ "think of it like this."
Click to expand...


Boo hoo, you're unhappy, write a letter to someone who
cares.
 
Back
Top