<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Sandy Bridge ULV leader is i7 2657M</title>
		<description>Discuss Sandy Bridge ULV leader is i7 2657M</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 12:36:15 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/21937/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>TechHog says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17050</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yeah, that's 7-8 hours under realistic usage (WiFi on). Honestly, I don't think that ULV will add any more to that figure due to most ultraportables having tiny batteries. However, I think that with a large battery and a 13" screen, 10 hours would be realistic. The screen is what eats up battery life the most in most notebooks. That's why I can't wait until the day that OLED becomes standard.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>TechHog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 2011 01:58:35 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17050</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123s says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17048</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If its barely used, it clocks the other cores down, so quad or not wont make a big difference for low load or you talk about 8h under high load XD ? Though 8h is still pretty nice, with wlan on ? Yes TDP refers to heat, and if something gets hot, a lot power flows through it. Not only that, stuff with high TDP need better cooling, while it could almost be cooled passive with low one = even more battery time. How big is the boost you expect ? I dont think its gonna be more then 2h+, what is still nice but nothing super awesome.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123s</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 2011 01:31:12 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17048</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>TechHog says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17045</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If a 45W quad-core can get 8 hours in a 17-inch laptop with a 71Wh battery, I'm sure that we'll see a boost. Also, Intel uses the TDP to refer to heat.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>TechHog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:02:44 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17045</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123s says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17044</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well, IMO it helps to estimate the power needed pretty good. Since high TDP = high heat and heat needs power. Mem. controller doesnt need much and even with GPU, its in best case ok. The old combo with U9600 and the crappy 4500 needed around 20W too. More efficient, sure but i dont think its significant more. Well, lets wait for first reviews, as for now it seems like a pretty small step for me.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123s</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 23:59:08 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17044</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>TechHog says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17043</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Actually, battery life will probably be quite a bit higher. The architecture is definitely efficient enough that battery life will increase. Remember that the IGP and memory controller are included in that TDP, and that TDP isn't a good measure of battery life in the first place.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>TechHog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 23:42:52 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17043</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123s says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17040</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I am aware that the performance will be better with same clocks, even without turbo and i dont think it will cut the battery, probably 10-20% more performance with same battery life but since its ultra portable i hoped for same/bit better performance but much better battery life. Guess i have to wait for 22nm then :/]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123s</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 20:08:17 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17040</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>TechHog says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17032</link>
			<description><![CDATA[By last-gen, I meant Arrendale. Keep in mind that clock speed isn't everything, and neither is TDP. It might look like this will cut battery by a lot while offering practically the same performance as the SU9600, but that's not the case at all. And again, consider the turbo boost. What were you expecting, though? To keep the TDP at 10W despite adding the GPU, memory controller, ect., while pushing the base clock to 2+GHz?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>TechHog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 19:15:29 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17032</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123s says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17029</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I remember that CULV U9600 with 1.6Ghz with 10W but without GPU or turbo, or do i mix something up hard ?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123s</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 19:05:23 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17029</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>hsew says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17026</link>
			<description><![CDATA[With a TDP of 17 watts it looks like it could give the atom platform and more importantly the zacate fusion platform a serious whooping. I'd love to have one of these in a netbook. Especially with a 2.7/2.4 Ghz turbo. The only problem is the fact that one of these puppies costs more than $300 on its own, as opposed to being able to buy an ENTIRE (albeit crappy) netbook for around that price.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>hsew</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 18:14:16 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17026</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>TechHog says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17021</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yeah, it has HD Graphics 3000 on the chip, like all notebook SBs. And the clocks are actually a huge improvement over previous ultra-low voltage CPU, especially compared to last-gen's 18W ULVs. (Don't get ultra-low voltage mixed up with low-voltage.) The max turbos are 2.7GHz on one core and 2.4GHz on two cores. (GPU clock is 350MHz-1.0GHz)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>TechHog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 17:18:50 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21937-sandy-bridge-ulv-leader-is-i7-2657m#comment-17021</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
