New laptop - slow processor

I’m looking to pick up a new laptop with a Full HD display. My main workflow involves programming in Visual Studio, some light amateur video editing, and just general web browsing and surfing.

Now, here’s my dilemma: is it actually worth shelling out extra cash $400 for a Core i3 processor instead of just grabbing a Pentium?

To give you some context, I’m currently running an Intel Core 2 Duo T9800 at 2.4 GHz. I haven't been able to find a decent benchmark to show me exactly how much faster something like an Intel Pentium 3556U would be compared to what I’m using right now.

I’ve had a chance to test a Core i3 against my current machine at work, and there's no question—it's noticeably faster than the Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHz. But does anyone know the deal with these newer 1.7 GHz Pentium processors? Is it a legitimate upgrade, or am I just buying a piece of junk that’ll perform exactly like the old hardware I'm trying to replace?

We aren't looking at a Pentium here, but we are looking at a newer generation.
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare.../m34360vsm3645

The difference isn't big enough to call it an actual upgrade. Since the 3556U is weaker than this Pentium anyway, you won't even notice much of a change compared to what you have now.

A Core i3 is noticeably better, but let's be real—it’s still not a massive leap. If you actually want to feel some progress, look into an i5 instead. I can't give you anything more concrete without knowing which laptops you're eyeing or what your criteria are.

Wait, so you're telling me this newer Pentium is basically the same piece of junk as a Core 2 Duo, maybe 20% faster at best? If that's the case, buying that processor is a complete waste of money. What is even the point of these new Pentiums? Why are they still on the shelves? Is it just some gimmick for better battery life?

Lately, there’s been this massive push toward lowering CPU power consumption. Take the Intel Pentium 3556; its TDP sits at a modest 15W, whereas your T9800 pulls a full 35W. Honestly, this trend mostly benefits the manufacturers. They get to shave costs on batteries and cooling systems, while what does the average user actually gain? A few extra cents saved on their annual electric bill? Hardly worth mentioning. And even that 15W is being considered "efficient" now—just look at those N-series chips with a TDP of 6-7W. Those things perform about as well as a single-core processor from over a decade ago. They can barely handle the most basic tasks without choking.

Jeffrey Chavez6 said:Lately, the whole industry has been obsessed with cutting down CPU power draw. Take the 3556U—it sits at a 15W TDP, whereas your T9800 pulls 35W. This shift plays right into the manufacturers' hands. It lets them cut corners on battery size and cooling systems, while the average consumer doesn't gain anything from saving a few cents on their monthly electric bill. And honestly, 15W is still being generous. Look at those low-end N-series chips with a 6-7W TDP; they perform like a single-core processor from over a decade ago. They aren't even capable of handling basic tasks.

So basically, they install a processor that gulps less power, but then they pair it with a tiny battery. The result? The laptop lasts just as long as before because the battery is smaller, regardless of how much more efficient the chip is.

It’s a joke. If they actually cared, they’d put in a better battery so you’d get 5 or 6 hours of actual runtime. Instead, they just pad their profit margins by cheapening the hardware.

Batteries are lasting longer on average than they used to, sure, but let’s be real: the whole goal here is just cutting costs for the manufacturers.