From: Douglas Hirsch, Maximum Upgrades (djhirsch_at_maxup.com)
Date: Thu Aug 05 1999 - 14:27:12 EDT
Jane,
Actually, "Pentium-level performance" can be achieved in the IBM ThinkPad
701 series. With the AMD5x86P75 microprocessor installed, the base clock
rate set to 33MHz, and the 16K L1 cache write-back mode enabled, CPU
performance is better than the P75.
Various CPU benchmarks show a performance increase between 2 and 3 times
faster than the original Intel 486. For DX4-75 models, CPU Dhrystones
benchmarks increase from 26041 to 60975. Norton SI shows the CPU
performance increasing from 95.4 to 287.9.
Randal's 20% speed increase indicates that the 5x86 was installed, but the
other features were not enabled.
Best wishes,
Douglas Hirsch
Internet Support
Maximum Upgrades
tel (916) 361-2870 P.O. Box 276945
fax (916) 361-2880 Sacramento, CA 95827
http://www.maxup.com
djhirsch_at_maxup.com "Software Bloat Solutions" (c)
-----Original Message-----
From: Jane Loyless <jloyless_at_netbox.com>
To: ThinkPad Mailing List <thinkpad_at_cs.utk.edu>
Date: Wednesday, August 04, 1999 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: Upgraded 701C Benchmark Results
>>Date: Sat, 03 Jan 1998 16:29:12 -0800
>>To: "Geovanny M. Ortiz" <o-n-a_at_shadow.net>
>>From: Randal Whittle <rwhittle_at_usa.net>
>>Subject: Re: Upgraded 701C Benchmark Results
>>Cc: "TP List" <tp750_at_cs.utk.edu>
>>Comment: to {un}subscribe, send mail to thinkpad-REQUEST_at_cs.utk.edu
>>
>>At 06:49 PM 12/31/97 -0500, Geovanny M. Ortiz wrote:
>>>All these numbers are too technical for me. My question is: Is it worth
>>>the money for the upgrade?
>>
>> Well, this is difficult for me to answer. I had wanted to just let the
>>numbers speak for themselves and not render an opinion, but if forced,
I'll
>>editorialize a bit.
>>
>> In a nutshell, I don't think so--at least for me.
>>
>> I had a 486-75 MHz, so this upgrade boosted it to something about the
same
>>as a 486-100 MHz. Overall speed increase in typical applications...I'd
say
>>about 20%.
>>
>> For me, that's just not significant enough. For me, I require at *least*
>>a 75% speed increase--preferably a 100% increase (at or near doubling)
>>before I think its worth considering an upgrade. For me, in laptops I
went
>>from a Sharp 386SX-20, to a ThinkPad 750 (486SL-33), to a TP 701
>>(486-75--but I have to say that the smaller form factor of the 701 made
the
>>less-than-stellar performance increase less of an important factor), to
>>finally a TP 560 (Pentium 120). In every case, that was a speed increase
>>of about 2x or better (a little less in the case of the 701 acquisition
>>over the 750). That's just something I require before I spend money on a
>>new machine.
>>
>> Now an upgrade may be something different for you than it is for me. I
>>always very much liked the 701--so much so that I rather missed it when I
>>moved to a 560 (I gave the 701 to my wife, so it was still around), but I
>>got over it without too much pain. For you, your 701 may be so near and
>>dear to you that you can't imagine leaving it for another computer. ;-)
>>If so, by all means--consider whether a 20% increase in speed is worth it
>>to you to pay for the upgrade (or maybe even a greater increase--keep in
>>mind I was upgrading a 486-75--many of you hav 486-50's out there that
>>would see a considerably greater speed increase of 40% to 50% instead of
my
>>mere 20%).
>>
>> So would I have paid for this upgrade? No--not unless the price was
>>somewhat nominal. 20% speed increase just doesn't do it for me. I barely
>>notice it the difference.
>>
>> But that doesn't mean it isn't it worth it to you or to someone else that
>>has different things that are important to them. For me, I've grown to
>>really like my 560. Its thinner form factor has actually become
preferable
>>to me over the 701's smaller, but thicker form factor. I no longer pine
>>for my 701. But for those of you who can't get over that, by all
>>means--this upgrade is one way in which you might be able to justify
>>stretching another year or two of use out of it.
>>
>>
>>One final note:
>>
>> PEP appears to be a very different outfit than they were a year or two
ago
>>when they annoyed us all with their blatant advertising on the list.
Their
>>new salesman, Leonard, has been most helpful in allowing us to do this and
>>upgrading my machine free of charge so I could do the benchmarks and
report
>>to the list about the results.
>>
>> And when this question about "OK, cut through the numbers crap--was the
>>upgrade worth it?" was posed, my first reaction was, "Well, I don't want
to
>>bias the results with my opinion--just let the numbers speak for
>>themselves." I wrote Leonard and told him what my truthful opinion
>>was--which you see in my note above. I didn't want to convey that to the
>>list because it seemed ungrateful to all they had given us to do this.
>>Leonard's reaction? "Tell them the truth."
>>
>> Now if you ask me, that's integrity--because he knew the truth was less
>>than flattering to their upgrade product. The previous sales guy who used
>>to infect our TP list used to tout claims of "Pentium-level performance"
>>(and we now know that claim is a pile of manure).
>>
>> If that integrity is any indication of how things have changed at PEP,
I'd
>>have to re-think my prior negative impression of them. No agenda--just
>>honesty. I was surprised and relieved because I really felt a conflict in
>>providing these results. I was determined to remain unbiased and
>>honest--and I was. the numbers you see in the benchmarks are the
>>gosh-awful truth and are not monkeyed with.
>>
>> My personal opinion was that this upgrade was no big improvement. But
>>having said that, I think you should examine the performance difference
and
>>see if its worth it to *you*, rather than simply echoing what I had to
say.
>>
>>
>>-------
>>Randal J. Whittle whittle_at_usc.edu (213) 740-7775
>>Director, Electronic Commerce Program
>>Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:55:13 EST