Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

"MSI Laptops: Turion X2 vs Centrino Duo"

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 27, 2006 7:22:42 PM

Quote:
After a little more than 6 months of presence on the market, Core Duo has us already to show all its capacities as well on the level of the performances as of autonomy. The potential buyers not having made their choice yet are extremely likely to await the arrival of the future generation of processors dual core for mobile platforms: Core 2 Duet, code name Merom. There are strong chances so that it is even more powerful and even less greedy in energy but he is likely to be sold a little expensive, which is already the case of Core Duo compared to Turion 64 x2. Moreover, this last is largely enough powerful to ensure you of many hours of production in all kinds, especially in a portable computer. Concerning Turion 64 x2, I must say that I expected all the same something of a little more, how to say, more “exotic”, more “new”. It is in fact nothing whole. It insipid, without any savour and especially left a little late after Core Duo what makes think of “heated”. Certe, the performances are there and it is about a very good processor for mobile platform the more so as the policy of consistent AMD to surround itself by many manufacturers of chipsets, WLAN, and others allows the manufacturers and assemblers a greater flexibility in their choices of components, but nothing made there, we have the unpleasant impression of “already considering”…

The principal interest of Turion 64 x2 at present remains the assumption of responsibility of the instructions 64 bits (from where the presence of the label Vista Capable) but especially its price like very often at AMD since compared with Core Duo, Turion 64 x2 is less expensive


Read the whole review and make your own conclusions. 8)

http://www.cowcotland.com/article149-1.html
June 27, 2006 7:49:50 PM

I'm blocked whats the general consensus? Main thing I'd like to find out is power and battery life. Performance is notebooks is always limited by the hdd and vid card anyway. I have a 600M which I'd like to replace because the battery life is not the greatest thing in the world.
June 27, 2006 8:05:27 PM

1) the comparison is between T2300(1.6GHz) and ML-56(1.8GHz).
2) the chart bars are fake. They are not starting from 0%, so compare only the numbers.
3) there is no performance/watt comparison
Related resources
June 27, 2006 8:12:07 PM

Isn't that the shi77iest Duo in existance?
June 27, 2006 8:15:22 PM

Quote:
Isn't that the shi77iest Duo in existance?

yeap, there is no more shittiest made yet. and there is only 1 model better than ML-56, the ML-60
June 27, 2006 8:18:49 PM

Quote:
Isn't that the shi77iest Duo in existance?

yeap, there is no more shittiest made yet. and there is only 1 model better than ML-56, the ML-60 Forgive me, I worded it incorrectly. I don't really like Core Duo, it sucks. Cre 2 Duo, however, does not.
June 27, 2006 8:33:25 PM

Quote:
After a little more than 6 months of presence on the market, Core Duo has us already to show all its capacities as well on the level of the performances as of autonomy. The potential buyers not having made their choice yet are extremely likely to await the arrival of the future generation of processors dual core for mobile platforms: Core 2 Duet, code name Merom. There are strong chances so that it is even more powerful and even less greedy in energy but he is likely to be sold a little expensive, which is already the case of Core Duo compared to Turion 64 x2. Moreover, this last is largely enough powerful to ensure you of many hours of production in all kinds, especially in a portable computer. Concerning Turion 64 x2, I must say that I expected all the same something of a little more, how to say, more “exotic”, more “new”. It is in fact nothing whole. It insipid, without any savour and especially left a little late after Core Duo what makes think of “heated”. Certe, the performances are there and it is about a very good processor for mobile platform the more so as the policy of consistent AMD to surround itself by many manufacturers of chipsets, WLAN, and others allows the manufacturers and assemblers a greater flexibility in their choices of components, but nothing made there, we have the unpleasant impression of “already considering”…

The principal interest of Turion 64 x2 at present remains the assumption of responsibility of the instructions 64 bits (from where the presence of the label Vista Capable) but especially its price like very often at AMD since compared with Core Duo, Turion 64 x2 is less expensive


Read the whole review and make your own conclusions. 8)

http://www.cowcotland.

com/article149-1.html



Ah yes, Mr. 9 inch and his fud. Well, here we go again and i'll sum it up lightly for you. Intel is more expensive because once again, they make a complete integrated platform. Everybody knows or should at least know by now, that Intel chipsets are not cheap. Why is this? Because they're good and IMO better than nVidia or ATI's chipsets. (we're talking mobile platform)

Face it, Intel has the best mobile platform out there right now and will continue to do so into the future from what I'm seeing from AMD. Nothing compares to an Intel platform as it has been shown time and time again that Intel chips work best when paired together. When someone buys a complete Intel setup, they're buying reliability and performance that of which, AMD currently does not have in the mobile market.
June 27, 2006 9:10:53 PM

Quote:
Read the whole review and make your own conclusions. 8)

I'd like to see your own conclusion.
My conclusion: They're just laptops.

Quote:
Crap vs crap. The crap wins.

Aww, I wanted the crap to win.
June 27, 2006 9:33:06 PM

Cowcotland, looks like the irony is lost on you.
June 27, 2006 9:39:01 PM

For power consumption, on page 8 they list the battery life for three typical tasks. Assuming the 8 cell battery is equal to about 64 whr, we get average power consumption of:

S271 (Turion)
DVD: 26.3W
Office: 24.5W
Full: 44.1W

S262 (Core Duo)
DVD: 21.8W
Office: 18.3W
Full: 33.7W

Quote:
On the other hand it is not the same with the sound harmful effects which emanate from these 2 portable computers. The S271-W1 makes a true noise of turbine since that is necessary with impressive variations whereas the S262-W1 offers a completely acceptable noise level, to see very appreciable.


The power consumption is also supported by the noise levels, where the S271 must run its fans at much louder levels to cool the hotter Turion X2.
June 27, 2006 10:18:39 PM

Quote:
For power consumption, on page 8 they list the battery life for three typical tasks. Assuming the 8 cell battery is equal to about 64 whr, we get average power consumption of:

S271 (Turion)
DVD: 26.3W
Office: 24.5W
Full: 44.1W

S262 (Core Duo)
DVD: 21.8W
Office: 18.3W
Full: 33.7W

On the other hand it is not the same with the sound harmful effects which emanate from these 2 portable computers. The S271-W1 makes a true noise of turbine since that is necessary with impressive variations whereas the S262-W1 offers a completely acceptable noise level, to see very appreciable.


The power consumption is also supported by the noise levels, where the S271 must run its fans at much louder levels to cool the hotter Turion X2.

Ye core duo is impressive for batt life. My dad's 6400 is dual core,slightly faster than 600m, has a widescreen and has a faster hdd. I dont think can compare power-wise until they finally get 65nm out the door.
June 27, 2006 11:12:18 PM

9-Inch,

You should not be quoting an article to support your claims of AMD superiority which concludes that:

Quote:
Regarding the Turion 64 x2, I must say that I was expecting something (how should I put it?) a little more “exotic”, more “new”. It is in fact nothing of the sort. It's insipid, without any flavor, and overcooked, considering it came out 6 months later than Core Duo. The word "reheated" comes to mind.
June 27, 2006 11:14:35 PM

Quote:
Read the whole review and make your own conclusions.


I conclude that you are full of cr@p.
June 27, 2006 11:44:34 PM

Hey, there is no need to be so offensive on 9nm. This is not his first, nor the last time to post a crap. Anyway, he said nothing about which one is good and which one is not. He said that we should make our own conclusions. So we can talk about the subject and the subject is not 9nm, no matter if some dosn't like him. Right?
June 27, 2006 11:51:48 PM

Oh owned again.
June 28, 2006 12:03:35 AM

Quote:
Hey, there is no need to be so offensive on 9nm. This is not his first, nor the last time to post a crap. Anyway, he said nothing about which one is good and which one is not. He said that we should make our own conclusions. So we can talk about the subject and the subject is not 9nm, no matter if some dosn't like him. Right?


He asked me to make my own conclusions.

I did. Based on the article and the countless others he has posted. It isn't a question of like or dislike - yuou expressed this, I didn't.
June 28, 2006 12:25:27 AM

Quote:
Oh, and try to be consistent - http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam...

Some clear dislike there.

And, what kind of probelms do you have with that?

None. Don't try and tell me not to do something when you then go and do it somewhere else.

Anyway, the subjects concerned would be clearly delighted if they see they are being discussed even in a bad light so I can't be bothered anymore - subject closed, have the last word if you want, etc, etc.
June 28, 2006 1:24:41 AM

Quote:
Hey, there is no need to be so offensive on 9nm. This is not his first, nor the last time to post a crap. Anyway, he said nothing about which one is good and which one is not. He said that we should make our own conclusions. So we can talk about the subject and the subject is not 9nm, no matter if some dosn't like him. Right?


Yea, I mean, it's in plain English, let's read it ourselves and make our own conclusions. :roll:
June 28, 2006 1:32:06 AM

Quote:
For power consumption, on page 8 they list the battery life for three typical tasks. Assuming the 8 cell battery is equal to about 64 whr, we get average power consumption of:

S271 (Turion)
DVD: 26.3W
Office: 24.5W
Full: 44.1W

S262 (Core Duo)
DVD: 21.8W
Office: 18.3W
Full: 33.7W

On the other hand it is not the same with the sound harmful effects which emanate from these 2 portable computers. The S271-W1 makes a true noise of turbine since that is necessary with impressive variations whereas the S262-W1 offers a completely acceptable noise level, to see very appreciable.


The power consumption is also supported by the noise levels, where the S271 must run its fans at much louder levels to cool the hotter Turion X2.

Check this out:


I really don't know how to interpret this other graph, but it clearly shows that Turion is consuming less power than the Core Duo (anyone correct me if I'm wrong)

Quote:
With the sight of these results one could very naturally think that Core Duo with its TDP of 31W is less greedy than its counterpart Turion 64 x2 with its 33W although the difference is not enormous all the same. But one should not be mistaken there, as I had indicated it to you to the beginning of this article, the processor is not the greediest element of a mobile platform and it is also necessary to take account of the other elements like the chipset, the graphics chip and the WiFi chart. In this case we can say that chipset ATI Radeon Xpress 1100 is obviously greedier than Intel I945GM. But is it at least more


TYhe other graphs clearly shows the Turion laptop leading the other benchmarks, so there's no arguing here.
June 28, 2006 1:38:29 AM

Quote:
Ah yes, Mr. 9 inch and his fud. Well, here we go again and i'll sum it up lightly for you. Intel is more expensive because once again, they make a complete integrated platform. Everybody knows or should at least know by now, that Intel chipsets are not cheap. Why is this? Because they're good and IMO better than nVidia or ATI's chipsets. (we're talking mobile platform)

Face it, Intel has the best mobile platform out there right now and will continue to do so into the future from what I'm seeing from AMD. Nothing compares to an Intel platform as it has been shown time and time again that Intel chips work best when paired together. When someone buys a complete Intel setup, they're buying reliability and performance that of which, AMD currently does not have in the mobile market.


Yeah, sure.

Is Core Duo 64-bit ready? I'm sad not

Is Core Duo Windows Vista capable? I'm sad not

Is Core Duo Future-proof? I'm sad not becasue Merom will kill it once it sees the light of day. :) 

Keep trying fanboy. :p 
June 28, 2006 1:39:39 AM

I believe that graph is battery life.

They didn't even do any real world benchmarks they were all synthetic, moron.
June 28, 2006 1:41:24 AM

Quote:
Is Core Duo 64-bit ready? I'm sad not


Meh.

Quote:
Is Core Duo Windows Vista capable? I'm sad not


Uh yes it is.

Quote:
Is Core Duo Future-proof?


Yes and the option to upgrade to merom is there which is 64bit as well.

Owned.
June 28, 2006 1:55:38 AM

Quote:
After a little more than 6 months of presence on the market, Core Duo has us already to show all its capacities as well on the level of the performances as of autonomy. The potential buyers not having made their choice yet are extremely likely to await the arrival of the future generation of processors dual core for mobile platforms: Core 2 Duet, code name Merom. There are strong chances so that it is even more powerful and even less greedy in energy but he is likely to be sold a little expensive, which is already the case of Core Duo compared to Turion 64 x2. Moreover, this last is largely enough powerful to ensure you of many hours of production in all kinds, especially in a portable computer. Concerning Turion 64 x2, I must say that I expected all the same something of a little more, how to say, more “exotic”, more “new”. It is in fact nothing whole. It insipid, without any savour and especially left a little late after Core Duo what makes think of “heated”. Certe, the performances are there and it is about a very good processor for mobile platform the more so as the policy of consistent AMD to surround itself by many manufacturers of chipsets, WLAN, and others allows the manufacturers and assemblers a greater flexibility in their choices of components, but nothing made there, we have the unpleasant impression of “already considering”…

The principal interest of Turion 64 x2 at present remains the assumption of responsibility of the instructions 64 bits (from where the presence of the label Vista Capable) but especially its price like very often at AMD since compared with Core Duo, Turion 64 x2 is less expensive


Read the whole review and make your own conclusions. 8)

http://www.cowcotland.com/article149-1.html


I finally got around to this and it looks good for AMD. I'm not sure how to linearize for Merom though because P4 was slower than Yonah (on the desktop). I'm sure though that the "fight" will be fair in August. I'm just glad they seemed to have gotten two systems from the same OEM.


Thats the best comparison. OEMs build all of their systems the same. It actually looks like Turion works better with higher latency RAM better than AM2.
June 28, 2006 1:56:46 AM

Quote:
Yes and the option to upgrade to merom is there which is 64bit as well.

Really?? :lol: 
How many user out there are going to "shift" their laptop processors once Moron arrives??

F u c k i n g d u m b a s s
June 28, 2006 1:58:15 AM

I'd expect quite the few of the more advanced users.

Good to see you're not ignoring me, despite the ownings I just handed out.
June 28, 2006 1:59:42 AM

Quote:

Is Core Duo 64-bit ready? I'm sad not


Uh, yea, because laptops need more than 4GB of RAM right now.


Quote:
Is Core Duo Windows Vista capable? I'm sad not


Uh, yes? It is?

Quote:
Is Core Duo Future-proof? I'm sad not becasue Merom will kill it once it sees the light of day. :) 



Because we all know that people upgrade their laptops. And uh, Merom and Core Duo are socket/mobo compatable anyway. Good job!

Quote:
Keep trying fanboy. :p 


Pot calling the silver kettle black.


Oh, and good job on reading graphs from your own link wrong.
June 28, 2006 2:01:57 AM

Quote:

Check this out:

Paper specs. It's the realworld that matters, and in the realworld the Core Duo even beats out the low-voltage single-core Turion MT in power consumption.

Quote:

I really don't know how to interpret this other graph, but it clearly shows that Turion is consuming less power than the Core Duo (anyone correct me if I'm wrong)

It's clearly battery life in minutes. Or do you think the full load power usage is less than the office power usage?


Quote:

TYhe other graphs clearly shows the Turion laptop leading the other benchmarks, so there's no arguing here.

The Core Duo wins a number of tests, despite the handicap in clock speeds. So similar performance for 30% better battery life, it's a clean kill for Core Duo.
June 28, 2006 2:01:58 AM

Quote:
1) the comparison is between T2300(1.6GHz) and ML-56(1.8GHz).
2) the chart bars are fake. They are not starting from 0%, so compare only the numbers.
3) there is no performance/watt comparison



It's a TL-50, ML is the single core designation. They are both from Voodoo. Rahul will not sell a system to favor a CPU.


Most bar charts can't accurately show the magnitude of the difference fi the units are fine instead of coarse. Don't worry though Merom will make up the difference. Unfortunately, again product differentiation will be difficult.

This is just a really good time to not have too many models overlapping.....

Excuse me for getting off topic.
June 28, 2006 2:03:13 AM

Quote:

How many user out there are going to "shift" their laptop processors once Moron arrives??

Probably the same ones who upgrade their OSes.
June 28, 2006 2:04:30 AM

BTW, for the system you include GMA950 results but looking at CPU benches will show why Dell is introing desktops and laptops with NOTHING BUT ATi/nVidia IGPs.


------not REALLY a barb
June 28, 2006 2:07:21 AM

Its official, you and the Turion X2 have been owned.
June 28, 2006 2:11:25 AM

Quote:


Most bar charts can't accurately show the magnitude of the difference fi the units are fine instead of coarse. Don't worry though Merom will make up the difference. Unfortunately, again product differentiation will be difficult.




Yea, whatever.
June 28, 2006 2:14:22 AM

More BM ownage. There you go, theres a link.
June 28, 2006 2:21:38 AM

Quote:
Paper specs. It's the realworld that matters, and in the realworld the Core Duo even beats out the low-voltage single-core Turion MT in power consumption.



Turion TL is dual core and those numbers in the first slide are for STANDBY. It means that in standby Turion X2 uses up to 63% LESS power meaning you can avoid turning your laptop off for longer periods.

If you go to the end of the article it tells you that they were testing dual core.

Turion X2 TL50- 1.6GHz
Core Duo T2300 - 1.66GHz
June 28, 2006 2:24:39 AM

Quote:


Most bar charts can't accurately show the magnitude of the difference fi the units are fine instead of coarse. Don't worry though Merom will make up the difference. Unfortunately, again product differentiation will be difficult.




Yea, whatever.

This was exactly my point dufus. It looks like a slaughter but it's only 3 POINTS DIFFERENCE
June 28, 2006 2:30:51 AM

Quote:


Most bar charts can't accurately show the magnitude of the difference fi the units are fine instead of coarse. Don't worry though Merom will make up the difference. Unfortunately, again product differentiation will be difficult.




Yea, whatever.

This was exactly my point dufus. It looks like a slaughter but it's only 3 POINTS DIFFERENCE


Uh, no, you were defending the use of varying origin points on the X-axis. Are you retarded? I mean, honestly.
June 28, 2006 3:15:19 AM

Quote:
Paper specs. It's the realworld that matters, and in the realworld the Core Duo even beats out the low-voltage single-core Turion MT in power consumption.


Turion TL is dual core and those numbers in the first slide are for STANDBY. It means that in standby Turion X2 uses up to 63% LESS power meaning you can avoid turning your laptop off for longer periods.
Yet in the review, the Core Duo laptop uses 6W less in the office test.

Quote:

If you go to the end of the article it tells you that they were testing dual core.

Turion X2 TL50- 1.6GHz
Core Duo T2300 - 1.66GHz

My point is that if Core Duo uses less power than the single-core Turion MT, what chance does the Turion X2 have? Even with AMD's desperate use of ULV of 1.075v.
June 28, 2006 4:15:35 AM

Quote:
My point is that if Core Duo uses less power than the single-core Turion MT, what chance does the Turion X2 have? Even with AMD's desperate use of ULV of 1.075v.

Stop posting FUD because you know this is fantasy.
There's no way a code duo uses less power than a single core Turion (even the low power MT series) so get your facts straight.

Just as I said before, a shitty core duo is no match for a Turion X2 becasue the later has 64-bit extensions and is better (price/performance) wise. :wink:
June 28, 2006 4:26:27 AM

This must really be getting to you the core duo performs better, is slightly more expensive, uses less power and has better battery life.
June 28, 2006 4:28:53 AM

Quote:
My point is that if Core Duo uses less power than the single-core Turion MT, what chance does the Turion X2 have? Even with AMD's desperate use of ULV of 1.075v.

Stop posting FUD because you know this is fantasy.
There's no way a code duo uses less power than a single core Turion (even the low power MT series) so get your facts straight.

Just as I said before, a shitty core duo is no match for a Turion X2 becasue the later has 64-bit extensions and is better (price/performance) wise. :wink: :lol: 
June 28, 2006 4:33:15 AM

Its funny how he says its sh!tty but links to a review saying its better.

Possibly funnier is that hes playing it down and highlighting the few advantages that the Turion X2 does have. So predictable.
June 28, 2006 5:01:31 AM

Quote:
My point is that if Core Duo uses less power than the single-core Turion MT, what chance does the Turion X2 have? Even with AMD's desperate use of ULV of 1.075v.

Stop posting FUD because you know this is fantasy.
There's no way a code duo uses less power than a single core Turion (even the low power MT series) so get your facts straight.

Just as I said before, a shitty core duo is no match for a Turion X2 becasue the later has 64-bit extensions and is better (price/performance) wise. :wink:

Turion X2 even with its 64-bit extensions blows so hard it shouldn't even be mentioned with the core duo. Comparing it to a celeron M would be more appropriate. :lol: 
June 28, 2006 5:20:16 AM

Quote:
My point is that if Core Duo uses less power than the single-core Turion MT, what chance does the Turion X2 have? Even with AMD's desperate use of ULV of 1.075v.

Stop posting FUD because you know this is fantasy.
There's no way a code duo uses less power than a single core Turion (even the low power MT series) so get your facts straight.
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article313-page5.html

Note: that is a Turion MT, they mis-labled it as a ML but it is labeled a MT on:
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article313-page2.html

and its voltage of 1.22v also confirms its a MT.
June 28, 2006 5:25:01 AM

Quote:
Quote:


Yeah, sure.

Is Core Duo 64-bit ready? I'm sad not

Is Core Duo Windows Vista capable? I'm sad not

Is Core Duo Future-proof? I'm sad not becasue Merom will kill it once it sees the light of day. :) 

Keep trying fanboy. :p 


first of all, wtf is i'm sad not? you need to relearn your english

1. is core duo 64bit ready? i'm sorry to say its not.

2. is core duo Windows Vista capable? yes it is. Vista comes in both 32bit and 64bit version. you and sharikou need to stop touting turions are the only one who is capable of running vista.

3. is core duo future-proof? nothing is future proof. after turion x2 came onto the screen, turions disappear without a trace. so, is turion future-proof? i'm sad not.

4. is 9-inch an idiot? yes he is. this review is not even considered fair. as pointed out before, core duo 1.6Ghz compared to turion 1.8? also, turions perform better in some benchmarks, because of its graphic card. take a look at the spec. X300 vs. integrated graphic? are you nuts?

if you compare the battery life with Core duo, i have to say, from the information presented in that review, turions have shorter battery life than core duo, because of its discret graphic, its higher TDP.

another thing is, you and sharikou needs to stop and think clearly. transition to 64bit is not going to take only months to complete. it will take at least half a year, to years to complete the full transition. most programs now will be written in both 32bit and 64bit. according to hkepc, even though intel gets no boost from 64bit enviroment, amd's fx-62 only gets 3~5% under 64bit.

wow... 3~5%.. isn't that not sufficient to cover the 5~30% performance advantage conroe presents?
June 28, 2006 5:27:05 AM

Quote:
Yes and the option to upgrade to merom is there which is 64bit as well.

Really?? :lol: 
How many user out there are going to "shift" their laptop processors once Moron arrives??

F u c k i n g d u m b a s s They must be shifting as we speak, because as far as I can tell, Moron has already arrived.
June 28, 2006 5:48:35 AM

lol... your calling everyone a fanboy while your the biggest AMD fanboy i have seen... lol... shut up you damn fanboy. The Core Duo was release wayyy before the Turion X2 so AMD can IMPROVE their processor besides I believe that Intel will lead in the Mobile department since Intel has more money to research than AMD.... seriously....
Once again... shut up fanboy
!