Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Compare Pentium M and P4

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 25, 2005 7:32:04 PM

Hello everyone!
I am thinking on purchasing a notebook, but I really have problems with configuration.
Currently I have a HP Compaq computer with 3.0 Ghz P4, and it's great. I don't want the notebook to much worse than this.
I need to figure out what Pentium M processor is comparable with a 3.0 Ghz P4?
I do mainly programming stuff. I want the new computer to work fine with Windows Longhorn + Microsoft Workflow + .NET2005 and SQL Server 2005 running simultaneusly. What processor should I aim for?
Is 512 MB Ram ok or should I consider bying 1 GB?
Thanks everyone in advance!

More about : compare pentium

December 25, 2005 8:46:54 PM

pentium m's dont run 64bit so youll have to look some where else. the turions seem like pretty good cpu's with 64bit support.
December 25, 2005 10:41:30 PM

Depends on the task. A Pentium M 2GHz is usually faster than a P4 3.0GHz.
Related resources
December 25, 2005 11:53:10 PM

I agree... the Pentium M architecture is superior to the Pentium 4. so in essence, performance would be comparable even if the clock speed of the Pentium M is lower than the P4.
a b à CPUs
December 26, 2005 12:14:35 AM

portable or desktop replacement?
December 26, 2005 1:01:22 AM

The Pentium 4 notebook you have right now is most likely a desktop replacement model. The Pentium 4 can provide a lot of speed for encoding tasks and such but uses a lot of power. The Pentium M on the other hand is built for battery life.

The is no point buying a Pentium M right now since they are going to be replaced by the dual core Yonah on January 5. You should wait for Yonah since it'll be superior to both the Pentium 4, the current Pentium M Dothan, and the Turion64. You'll want to look at the 2GHz model. The maximum speed Yonah will launch at is 2.16GHz. They will directly replace current models at the same price with the 2.16GHz dual core replacing the 2.26GHz, the 2 GHz replacing the 2.13GHz, etc. You don't lose much in clock speed, and that is made up by both the dual core nature and the redesigned FPU, vector unit, full SSE2 and SSE3 support, and expanded micro-ops fusion.

BTW to liquidpaper007, I have know idea what not having 64-bit support has anything to do with supporting Vista. Vista will be released in both 32 and 64-bit version. Besides, a notebook really doesn't have much use for 64-bit support anyways since it won't be able to hold more than 4GB of RAM and most notebooks aren't used for heavy encoding which is the main benefit of 64-bit technology.
December 26, 2005 1:40:13 AM

Quote:
since it won't be able to hold more than 4GB of RAM

(sarcasm) But with the way vista will gobble memory, you'd think M$ would come up with some kind of "trade file" that would allow it to use part of a hdd to be used as virtual memory (end of sarcasm)
Since vista will be such a memory hog, 512 seems a little low.
December 26, 2005 3:26:59 AM

Thanks to everyone.

Quote:
The Pentium 4 notebook you have right now is most likely a desktop replacement model. The Pentium 4 can provide a lot of speed for encoding tasks and such but uses a lot of power. The Pentium M on the other hand is built for battery life.

The is no point buying a Pentium M right now since they are going to be replaced by the dual core Yonah on January 5. You should wait for Yonah since it'll be superior to both the Pentium 4, the current Pentium M Dothan, and the Turion64. You'll want to look at the 2GHz model. The maximum speed Yonah will launch at is 2.16GHz. They will directly replace current models at the same price with the 2.16GHz dual core replacing the 2.26GHz, the 2 GHz replacing the 2.13GHz, etc. You don't lose much in clock speed, and that is made up by both the dual core nature and the redesigned FPU, vector unit, full SSE2 and SSE3 support, and expanded micro-ops fusion.

BTW to liquidpaper007, I have know idea what not having 64-bit support has anything to do with supporting Vista. Vista will be released in both 32 and 64-bit version. Besides, a notebook really doesn't have much use for 64-bit support anyways since it won't be able to hold more than 4GB of RAM and most notebooks aren't used for heavy encoding which is the main benefit of 64-bit technology.


I guess when they release the new processor the old one will become cheaper.
So guys pls your conclusion: For the tasks I described, what is the minimal system configuration?
December 26, 2005 4:42:26 AM

I was just pointing out that most notebook motherboards don't even support 4GB of RAM so 64-bit support isn't very critical. It's hard to tell how much RAM Vista would need since the OS itself will use more memory than XP, but some system RAM is saved because all visual desktop graphics are now offloaded to video RAM.

For PlayJunior, you'd probably want a dual core Yonah around 2GHz should be fine. I'm not positive, but I think most programming applications and compilers can benefit from a dual core so Yonah would be a good choice. You'd want 1GB of DDR2 667 RAM, which is the fastest Yonah supports and will allow you to run in sync with the 667MHz FSB. Since you mainly do programming or office work and not gaming, your choice of graphics card isn't really important. Integrated solutions like the Intel Digital Media Accelerator 950 or the ATI Xpress 200M are good enough for standard viewing and help maximize battery life. However, if you plan on using high resolution external monitors or projectors you could opt for something a little higher.
December 26, 2005 5:01:31 AM

Memory addressing is not restricted to physical memory. The 4 gis includes the swap file.
Putting vista into a 32 bit setup would be like having a ferrari with a 1200 cc engine. It may be able to work, but 15 minute boot times are very annoying.
December 26, 2005 5:41:09 AM

I dont think I need more than 1GB RAM. The programms I described will work with 512 on WinXP, I doubt if the difference is that big with LongHorn.
December 26, 2005 8:30:42 AM

Yes the Pentium M is better than the P4 MHz to MHz! However the M lacks x86_64 support and is not that great.

AMD currently has the price/performance crown - Intel is lagging behind!!!!

I would suggest you grab an excellent yet inexpensive Athlon 64 939 and an nForce4 or VIA K8T890 or K8T800 motherboard, at least 1024MB [1GB] PC3200 and maybe a cheap PCI-E VGA you'll be all set!!!!

An nForce4 will run you 90 bux maybe,

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1681...

or you can get the VIA K8T800 with AGP if you have a decent AGP VGA already

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1681...

plus

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1682...

a nice 6600GT will cost you about $120 if you decide to get the nForce4 board.



MOBO: nForce4 with PCI-E 94.50 or K8T800 with AGP 82.99

CPU: AMD64 3200+ RETAIL 162.99

RAM: 1GB (2 x 512MB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM Dual Channel Kit 81.06

VGA: 6600GT PCI-E about $130 delivered [OPTIONAL - only if you use nForce4]

Total damage:

$327.04 delivered for the K8T800 with AGP :-)

$468.55 delivered for the nForce4 with PCI-E and 6600GT :-D

Not bad at all :-D

Good luck!

PS Vista is all HYPE - Have you considered using Linux? Linux + XP would be the best all around way to get work done and play games.
December 26, 2005 8:32:54 AM

"I am thinking on purchasing a notebook..."
December 26, 2005 8:38:42 AM

Get an Athlon 64 notebook from a good mfg :-)

Get it even if it only has 256MB RAM and replace it with 1GB PC3200 yourself - it will be cheaper that way.
December 26, 2005 8:43:48 AM

If you are running programs simultaneously, as you mentioned, then at least 1 gig is advisable. I would personally hold out for the Yonah or the next AMD equivalent, depending on price/performance. Dual cores are built for multi-tasking and offer superior system stability and obviously speed in multi-tasking environments.

As for Vista, recent reports indicate that it will require at least 512MB to operate. When XP was released, the minimum was 128MB, but 256MB was a hell of a lot better to run with. If we learn anything from past experience with MS, then minimum really means barebones minimum. So given that you need a minimum of 512 just for Vista running probably solitare or minesweep, a gig at the very least is advisable, for multitasking. This MS link shows the current Vista hardware specs required :

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/windowsvista/evaluate/...
December 26, 2005 9:00:21 AM

I am not considering Athlon at all. Athlon notebooks have one thing that is absolutely unacceptable-THEY ARE NOISY.
December 26, 2005 9:59:09 AM

I would be looking at a Turon 64 or anyother in the AMD mobile range

The 64 bit support will be crutial when programing for Vista (im assuming your not gonig to be running longhorn the server version ;) ) rember you can always use a 64 bit processor in a 32 bit envoronment but you cant go the other way, and seeing as the current generation of pentium M dosent support this its a problem for you.

also currently AMD processors are using less power and generate less heat in general (i havent looked as specifics for mobile processors so it could be diffrent here.)

a dual core processor would definatly be a benifit to you running that many IDE's at the same time and 1gb would be an advantage, but 512 will work, but its like having a volvo verses a merc :) 

you have said athalons are noisy, have you looked at diffrent manufactures for this? im sure you will find some a quiter than others, just like diffrent cooling setups on a desktop PC, im sure you will also find a few noisy Intel based laptops to if you do some leg work and check them out. IMO going down the the local computer shop can give you far more of an idea at what to look at than a forum on the internet in this regard.

im also going to suggest you DO NOT upgrade yet, the windows vista specs are still not set in stone, but are already higher than what you are likly to find in any desktop let alone laptop (anyone seen a 2.5" SATA drive latly? let alone NCQ) so if you dont need the upgrade yet try to hold of for about 6 months if your looking at something that you can throw vista on and have it work well and when the specs are a lot closer to being finalised for the release version.
December 26, 2005 10:02:49 AM

I guess it depends on how much money you have to spend. Since the new Pentium Ms will come in dual and single core flavors, it safe to say the the dual core 2.16 Ghz Yonah will cost around 700 bucks. I am a big spender, but I dont think 700 bucks for a CPU that performs at or below an X2 3800 is worth the cash. The athlon notebooks you speak of are based off of the socket 754 A64s. they are built on the .13 micron process and yes they are very hot. But the 939 CPUs are cooler than your P4 notebook. I think you should at least take a look and consider one. I dont know of availability on them, but it is a better option than another P4 notebook and cheaper than the Pentium M option. If temperature and silence is your determining factor, then yes a Pentium M is the best option. If temps, silence, and COST are the determining factors, then a Turion notebook is the best option. It does graphics better and is only marginally hotter than a Pentium M.
December 26, 2005 10:18:45 AM

I don't have much money to spend, and knowing Intel's pricing politics I suspect that the new dual core processor will be quite expensive and not worth at all in terms of performance/cost for a while.
If you are sure that the Turion processors are relly not noisy and are comparable with Pentium M performance-wise, it is worth considering. I am going to get a HP or something in that kind, so if the processor itself isn't just overheating the cooling will make no problems-those companies assemble comps really good.
For the tasks I described, can anyone say what is the performance-analoguos to Pentimum M 1.86 Ghz or 2.0 Ghz in Thurion lineup?
December 26, 2005 10:44:11 AM

I dont know dude. Today's Pentium Ms perform at or just a little above the Turion. Come to think of it, the Pentium M's system temp should be about the same as the Turion since the memory controller for the Petium M is not integrated. But on average, the Pentium M carries a $200 premium. I think it is safe to say that on most tasks, a dual core Yonah clocked at 1.6 Ghz-1.8 Ghz, will perform better than any CPU clocked at the same speed on most tasks, but we dont know how much they will cost. Here is my preference in order:
1. An Athlon X2 3800 desktop replacement notebook (avail now)
2. A lower clocked base model dual core yonah Pentium M (not avail)
3. A Turion notebook at 1.8 Ghz (35 watt model) with a good graphics subsystem.

Do a google search on Pentium M vs Turion and you will get a better idea of what you need.
December 26, 2005 10:50:01 AM

Quote:
For the tasks I described, can anyone say what is the performance-analoguos to Pentimum M 1.86 Ghz or 2.0 Ghz in Thurion lineup?


Pentium M 1.86GHz = Turion 64 ML-34 1.8GHz
Pentium M 2.0GHz = Turion 64 ML-37 2.0GHz

Pentium M uses less power when the CPU is idle. Turion uses less power under full load.
December 26, 2005 12:29:40 PM

I asked my CDW rep once about how to compare the M line to the Pentium 4s. He said that Intel's general rule of thumb is that you multiply the Pentium M's speed by 1.5 to get a general 32 bit comparison to the Pentium 4s. So in theory a Pentium M 1.8 GHz should perform like a Pentium 4 2.7 GHz.
December 26, 2005 12:45:14 PM

I think thats about right. I have a 1ghz ULV and it encodes video about 50% slower than my 2ghz Athlon XP. So a 500mhz+ mark up sounds right to me.
December 26, 2005 4:28:33 PM

If you are concerned about noise, heat and power consumption then the X2 3800+ is not a good choice. Those are desktop chips with a TDP of 89W dropped into a notebook system which even a Turion64 has a TDP of 35W. For dual core comparisons, the 2GHz Yonah actually performs comparable to the X2 3800+ or X2 4000+ (which was never released but the extra cache generally doesn't make much of a difference performance-wise). The 2.16GHz Yonah would be comparable to the X2 4800+. Anandtech has shown that Yonah can meet the X2's performance at the same clock speeds without a memory controller. And this was with Yonah running DDR2 533 memory which is out of sync with the 667MHz FSB.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2648&p=7

Since Yonah is a direct line replacement for the current Pentium M Dothans, the 2.16GHz Yonah+Motherboard+Wireless Card would cost around $700. The 2GHz Yonah+Motherboard+Wireless Card which is comparable performance-wise to the X2 3800+ would cost under $500. Intel's projected pricing for the Yonah processors alone is:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26062

The advantage the Centrino line has over the Turion64 platform is by controlling the processor, motherboard and wireless card that goes into the notebook, power consumption and heat can be optimized. Use of DDR2 RAM also helps in reducing power consumption. Intel is claiming that Yonah will cut power consumption by 28% over current Pentium Ms, which is quite possible considering the widespread use of sleeping transistors and the throttling FSB.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28330
a c 111 à CPUs
December 26, 2005 5:18:51 PM

Quote:
I am not considering Athlon at all. Athlon notebooks have one thing that is absolutely unacceptable-THEY ARE NOISY.

I guess you must have got some low end notebook at one time?
after all my a64-3000 notebook does not make much noise unless it's loaded to the nuts. lets just say the hard drive is louder then the fans. and this is a Compaq/HP with 2 fans one runs slow under lower loads and 2 at low-ish speed under full load. with programming and what not I don’t think the load will ever be that high.
December 27, 2005 3:38:25 AM

I don't think that it was a low-end notebook. It was my friend's notebook which was bought for him my their company for working from home ;) 
As for prices, where can I find current processor pricing? Because 650$ for 2.16 Ghz seems really expensive to me.
December 27, 2005 3:55:16 AM

Quote:
I don't think that it was a low-end notebook. It was my friend's notebook which was bought for him my their company for working from home ;) 
As for prices, where can I find current processor pricing? Because 650$ for 2.16 Ghz seems really expensive to me.

The 2.16GHz dualcore yonah isn't released yet and I don't think 650$ was just for the CPU. Anyway it isn't that expensive. You shouldn't look at the frequency so much, the CPU really kicks ass.

But if your on a budget, buy a Pentium M.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2005 4:29:21 AM

You say Athlon notebooks are noisey and you're considering a Pentium 4 instead? Is this Bizarro World?
December 27, 2005 4:40:25 AM

Had you read the thread before posting you should notice that there has been not a single word about Pentium 4 based notebook. I am considering Pentium M.
December 27, 2005 5:54:22 AM

LtCmdr Data is right on this one for sure. Just wait a bit. With a 3ghz CPU you arent hurting for power thats for sure. Like I said before, I have a 1ghz P-m and it works admirably for a slow CPU. The HDD regularly get hotter than the CPU. I wish it had better power saving features (lowering brightness on the LCD has the most impact) but if I am not mistaken, Yonah will adress that batter than dothan did. Patience, patience, and more patience! Wait and see what is on sale too. From what I have read, single core yonahs are not going to improve performance that much. If there is a premium on price for single core yonahs, then maybe you can get a dothan core P-m on sale or close out on new egg. Who knows? Maybe single core yonahs will be cheaper than dothans and the dual cores will be the expensive ones this time.
December 27, 2005 6:02:32 AM

I would agree with you if it wasn't Intel...:) 
As far as I know Intel highens old processor prices just before they get out of fabrication. It is always not worth buying the top-end and the lower-end intel processors. That is, they just might high the Pentium M 1.86 Dothan's price. And the Yonah one might prove to be expensive due to accessories (667 Mhz DDr, new mobo etc.).
I am confused...
December 27, 2005 7:08:54 AM

Yeah dude, laptops are a mixed bag at best. I paid $2300 for my fujitsu lifebook 6100. I got all the bells and whistles to include an extra high capacity battery. Ironically, for all the power saving features of the centrino platform, the thing that is killing me is that fact that my batteries are getting old. I used to get 10 hrs on them. Now I get 7. Clocking the CPU from 1ghz to 600Mhz only gets me another 30 minutes or so. Lower the screen brightness can get me up to another hour and 15 minutes if I am not doing anything serious on it. In retrospect, I wish I had never paid so much for it. It has intel extreme graphics2. I can barely play Rome: total war. I frequently get lock ups and CTD. It neat to look at but very impractible for a moderate power user. The screen is 1280x768 so some programs are perpetually missing buttons and what not (like Civ3 editor). The funny thing is that I am so self concious about power I never use it unless I am connected to a power source. It really is a waste. If you are going to do this, then go all the way. Get like an alienware laptop with Geforce 6600GO graphics, a 1.7-1.86 Ghz CPU, 1 GB of RAM and all that jazz. If you are not willing to spend some serious cash I think you will regret your purchase. I think a fast sempron or Turion CPU in a 15.4" chassis is good to go right now. The new yonah core will be good by mid 2006. Like I said, notebooks are a moxed bag and its impossible to get everything you want. I say the best strategy is a good desktop and a cheap disposable notebook for light gaming and Divx movies on the go. Good luck!
December 27, 2005 8:02:39 AM

Oh, battery life is not an option for me. I will be connected 95% of time:) 
The only game I might be playing with that laptop is Starcraft Broodwar, which runs perfectly on a P133 Mhz with 1-2 MB video :) 
I also like non-wide (ordinal ) screens, but now most of the laptops seem to come with wide screen, I don't know why.
Btw I am going to spend ~1100-1200$ for that computer.
I think I will stick on 1.86 Ghz P M (Dothan or Yonah, dunno) or 2Ghz Thurion, 1 Ghz RAM. I think I will fit in that budget.
a b à CPUs
December 27, 2005 8:15:10 AM

I think I have an answer!

Big notebooks might come with a widescreen display because they cost more. Really, people want to pay more to get trendy things. It's all about widescreen DVD play which most people who buy them never do.

Small notebooks are starting to come with lower resolution widescreens. Again that's fine for DVD play, since DVD's aren't high-resolution anyway. But more importantly, small notebooks are...small! People want keyboards that are as close to full-size as possible, that limits how narrow the laptop can be, so the laptop is shrunk in other dimensions.

I think it's mostly a matter of getting the biggest screen to fit a notebook of a given size. That, and the trendiness of widescreen displays. When you combine the two things, a manufacturer can say "Look, it's a 17" display on a notebook that's only x by x dimensions! And on top of that, it's widescreen!" Funny thing about widescreen, you can make the numbers bigger on a screen that has less viewable area.
December 27, 2005 4:16:01 PM

Yes, AMD is releasing the ML-44 as a stop gap measure to counter the upcoming Yonah launch. While the ML-44 will be superior in games due to its faster single-core clock speed, Yonah will still be better for most tasks due to its multithreading and power saving features. (The thing can deactivate the second core to save power and sleep all of its transistors except the ones currently in use). AMD won't be able to offer a dual core Turion64 until late April at the earliest which is when Socket S1 comes out. I wonder why they called it S1, and gave the name M2 to the desktop?
December 28, 2005 3:50:07 AM

I was looking at the comparison of Yonah 2.13 Ghz to Athlon X2 3800+, Athon X2 4200+ and Pentium D 3.0 Ghz. In fact it outperformed Pentium 3.0 Ghz in almost all tests and was like almost equal with 3800+. It is quite impressive. I think I will get me a 2.0 Ghz or even a 1.86 Yonah, especially when the price is same as Dothan.
December 28, 2005 7:29:15 AM

Do you think that intel will follow AMD's pricing policy on its dual core yonahs ie, the cheapest dual core is as expensive as its highest clocked single core. Or will say, a dual core 1.6 ghz CPU be less expensive than a 2.16 ghz single core? I am very surprised at the performance of these chips. Just for the sake of saved money on electrical bills and lower heat, I wouldnt mind getting a dual core 1.86 yonah for $300 even if it was slower than an X2 3800. But if the damned thing is going to be like 400 bucks then they can keep it.
December 28, 2005 8:58:22 AM

A link was posted in this thread that sowed the pricings for Yonah. 1.86 was < 300$, 2.0 Ghz was like 400 with something, 2.13 was 650, and <1.86 the price difference was not that much, so it was clearly best in performance/price-wise to get the 1.86 thing.
As for as 2.13~3800+ => 1.86~3800*1.86/2.13=3318, which is only slightly worse or even with P4 2.8 Ghz I guess.
It will be great if I get that new Yonah-based system with today's 1.86 Dothan price. I doubt I can.
Anyhow, thank you for your help guys, your comments were really useful and helped me to come to a decision.
To a right one, I hope.... 8)
!