G4400T vs G4400 (reducing TDP via Windows processor state)

Got a shopping cart of parts that you want opinions on? Get advice from members on your planned or existing system (or upgrade).

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

Post Reply
eadmaster
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:35 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

G4400T vs G4400 (reducing TDP via Windows processor state)

Post by eadmaster » Mon Feb 13, 2017 1:04 pm

I am considering getting a Pentium G4400T due to its very low TDP rating (35W) and my system constraints.

Btw since it is harder to find than a regular G4400 (TDP 54W), as alternative do you think i might get similar thermal/power performances by reducing the max processor state in the Windows advanced power management tab?

CA_Steve
Moderator
Posts: 7651
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am
Location: St. Louis, MO

Re: G4400T vs G4400 (reducing TDP via Windows processor stat

Post by CA_Steve » Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:15 pm

You could go that route...or go into the mobo BIOS settings and:
- limit the freq clock to the T's 2.9GHz. Other than that, the two parts are the same.
- if you are feeling the mod spirit - try undervolting the CPU by applying a small (0.05 to 0.1V) negative offset to the core voltage.

That said, if I were to consider a $65 CPU build in the next month or two, I'd go for the Kaby Lake G4560. Faster clock, similar power use, and it has hyperthreading! Basically a dialed down i3.

VERiON
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:42 am
Location: EU

Re: G4400T vs G4400 (reducing TDP via Windows processor stat

Post by VERiON » Tue Feb 14, 2017 3:03 am

Maybe this changed with newer CPUs, but last time I've checked (socked 1155) it wasn't really beneficial to go with T CPUs.
TDP is not IDLE (or normal usage) power consumption (or heat dissipation) and T CPUs don't have measurably different power characteristics at the same clocks, they're just clocked a little lower - and that is why they generate less head - but only WHEN MAXED OUT.

But idle (or when cpu is let's say @75% CPU) power is generally the same between T and non T.

So if the T is good enough for your usage and you won't be maxing it out - non-T won't be running any hotter in this scenario. And even for short high cpu usage "bursts" you will get more performance (and heat), but a quicker return to cool idle state with the non-T varieties - and your system shouldn't get significantly hotter.

-------

With Pentium G860 CPU (3GHz max and 65W TDP) and SSD - my whole computer draws 35W with normal office work or watching movie, YT, etc. An it's "passively" cooled - only with case fan @800rpm

Abula
Posts: 3662
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:22 pm
Location: Guatemala

Re: G4400T vs G4400 (reducing TDP via Windows processor stat

Post by Abula » Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:44 am

Steve advise is the best, only reason in the past to make the T versions worth it, was if you couldnt limit the clocks (via software or bios) as it will end up the same as none T version, and if you wanted a low profile intel cpu cooler. Personally i think its best to go with none T models and adjust it to what your setup needs.
CA_Steve wrote: I'd go for the Kaby Lake G4560. Faster clock, similar power use, and it has hyperthreading! Basically a dialed down i3.
I also agree with steve, the G4650 is intel way of fighting the upcoming AMD Ryzen, they practically release an i3 at the price levels of the pentium line, its to me atm the king of value on a budget friendly pc, its prefermance rivals a quad core like i5 2500k not overclocked, its incredible value for $60.

I really hope that intel gives us a 6 core in the next gen of i7.... but we can only dream.... but i bet will happen if Ryzen is good.

quest_for_silence
Posts: 5275
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Location: ITALY

Re: G4400T vs G4400 (reducing TDP via Windows processor stat

Post by quest_for_silence » Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:06 pm

eadmaster wrote:and my system constraints.

Which are your "system constraints"? On your signature I wasn't able to see any.

Post Reply