Already have an i7 quad core laptop computer - it gets too hot to sit on my lap, even with light use/idle, and the battery life is absolutely pathetic - less than 2 hrs, even with an oversize battery. In addition, it’s slow, even despite the retrofit with a hybrid HDD. It’s the stupidest purchase I’ve ever made, although I bought it at a time when I was ripping/converting alot of blurays to mkv.
Turns out my older Q6600 desktop was as fast as, if not faster, than the I7 laptop.
I’d be just as happy with my older core2 duo 2.1Ghz 13" laptop, remote desktopping to my beefy Desktop machine …
Screw laptops with quad core processors … get a faster dual core, get a nice beefy graphics chip that turns off when not in use, and retrofit the lappy with a giant capacity SSD and lots of ram.
More cores is a waste of time for 99% of uses -> improve the logic, improve gate efficiency, improve heat characteristics, improve the processing efficiency. Two cores is enough.
The scientific community is fully dreading the end of the speed increases … some things are just … linear … in nature, and don’t benefit extra cores.
Running 1000 linear routines which finish in 2 weeks doesn’t sound as nice two routines finishing every 30 minutes …