Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Laptop Cpus

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 5, 2006 6:13:54 AM

I would post this on mobile but there a moron there like 9 inch They be leave Amd has the best laptop system. Also the guy selling his laptops from toms hardware forums. Very unprofessional. But when I ask if he has reviews from cnet pcmag toms hardware and other websites. You get nothing it like he trys to bash you so the subject change.

So if anyone see any good benchmarks on any laptops let me know.

That is why every one in Mobile forum is coming here. There are getting false info from a guy there. It pretty much. My mobile note book has 2 hours battery life amd cpu then gives out bench marks I don't be leave unless you over clock it. Then you get people buying his system on false info.

I try to post info like Faster the laptop the shorter the battery life. The size of the laptop the also affects battery life and mobilty. Also the size of the battery also helps. But it is always the desktops are the faster.

More about : laptop cpus

a c 87 à CPUs
a b D Laptop
December 5, 2006 7:11:34 AM

What? Is there even a question?

Higher numbered model cpus are faster then lower numbered ones. Got it?
December 5, 2006 7:50:58 AM

I already know that nitwit. But I want some type of view on Amd and intel laptops. Which one better and why.
Related resources
December 5, 2006 7:56:32 AM

What do you want the laptop for? Gaming? Office work?... Anyway, a good start point for you to search for benchmarks is "merom", intel's core2duo processor.

By the way, there are also mobile workstations using amd and intel's desktop processors (athlons and P4, though), but they're power hungry and heavy, things that you don't seem quite interested in... also very expensive, yes.

Cheers.

PD: By the way, there are merom reviews and benchmarks in TomsHardware... use the search engine, come on! :wink:
a c 87 à CPUs
a b D Laptop
December 5, 2006 8:11:10 AM

nitwit? Whats with the name calling? Obviously english isn't your first language and I found what you wrote to be rather hard to read. You didn't state the usage for the laptop. You didn't state a budget. You didn't provide links to two or more models asking which is faster, better, etc. You wrote in broken english something about a guy who sells laptops and doesn't show how good they are(?) You then asked for links that compare laptops. Compare how? Speed? Features? Battery power? Name calling isn't called for. A rewrite of your post that better asks your question is.
December 5, 2006 11:47:14 AM

Turion is okay. Merom kicks ass, blah blah blah, its the same as it always has been. Intel wins in the mobile section.
December 5, 2006 12:24:56 PM

... Don't have to be so mean... man, everyone here needs to take a chill pill...

As of now, the C2D for laptops are currently quite a bit better than AMD's Dual-core Turion for 2 main reaons, power-consumption and performance. Of course, this can be said for the whole Core 2 Duo line-up. Doesn't matter what you're using the laptop for, C2D will in almost all cases trump the Turion. In some cases, the difference might be marginal, but the overall advantage goes to the C2D. For more in-depth review:

Can't find any. I suck.
December 5, 2006 1:28:47 PM

Check Cnet. They tend to have good laptop reviews. Or PC Mag/PC World. The more mainstream sites have an abundance of lappy reviews.

Myself? I have a Satellite M65 with a Pentium M (the original Centrino and BEST pre-Core Intel processor). A little dated, but that's what my build's for.
December 5, 2006 1:48:21 PM

I have a 2 1/2 year old ABS laptop. I liked it, HDD died on me, but it was to be expected with all the torrenting and stuff I put it through... 7200 RPM though, 2 1/2 years ago, I paid a pretty penny for it...
December 5, 2006 2:59:11 PM

sempron mobile vs. celeron mobile

which one performs better?
and which one has the longer battery life?

thanks :) 
December 5, 2006 3:09:24 PM

.... I'd say mobile Celeron.
a c 102 à CPUs
December 5, 2006 3:46:08 PM

The mobile Sempron has a longer battery life as it has frequency scaling enabled. The mobile Celerons are maybe a touch faster but always run at full clock speed. I'd go with the Sempron in this case, but I'd suggest a Core Solo or low-end Turion over either if you want an inexpensive laptop CPU.
December 5, 2006 5:18:13 PM

I bought an Inspiron 1200 notebook a year and a half ago for $450 shipped. It was the lowest of the low end in Dells line, but I didn't need it for anything more than surfing the web, office work, and general mobility. It had a Celeron M 1.3GHz Dothan cpu. It was quick enough with that, but as others said, without any speedstep, the notebook's battery life suffered. I'd typically get ~2 useable hours out of it when surfing the web (43 watt/hr battery). The cpu would get up to 60deg C within 15 minutes, then the fan would turn on, run the temp back down to 50, and after about 3 minutes the temp would be back up to 60.

At the beginning of this fall I picked up a Pentium M 1.4GHz Banias off ebay for the paltry sum of $12.50 shipped. best thing I ever did to the notebook. Now that I have speedstep, I've permanently set the CPU to run at 600MHz, and undervolted it to only 0.7volts. By doing this I now get an extra hour of battery life (3 useable hours now when surfing the web), and the cpu never gets hotter than 40deg C (meaning the cpu fan never turns on). I have since changed fan to start at 35C and stop at 30C, but on a cold day when my apartment is below 25C, the cpu will never reach 35deg C unless I run a very cpu intensive task. Because of the applications I use on my notebook, most of the time I never notice the decreased cpu speed.
December 5, 2006 10:40:15 PM

thank you all for the input. :) 
December 6, 2006 6:07:31 AM

thanks for the link, it really helps :) 
December 7, 2006 1:40:16 AM

The Dell Inspiron 2200 in that review is the clone to my 1200. The 1200/2200 share the same shell and mobo, but the 2200 is meant to be a slightly upgraded version of the 1200, usually offered with such things as a 15" screen, built in wireless, an 8-cell 65 watt/hr Li-Ion battery and a Pentium M. The way they have it configured, that Inspiron 2200 is EXACTLY the same as my Inspiron 1200 (with the exception of my cpu being a little slower at 1.3 GHz and my hard drive being smaller at 30GB, but that's due to the date of purchase (I got mine in June 2005 for $399 w/free shipping, ~$450 after taxes and handling, while they did their review a full 6 months later, as Dell slowly increased the cpu performance and hard drive size to stay competitive with the rest of the market).

In defense of the Inspiron 2200 in that review, the reason it got such poor battery life had nothing to do with its hardware, or the fact that it used NiMH batteries. What Anandtech didn't say was that its battery was only rated at 43 watt/hr, which is pretty low, but it's still better than the 4 cell Li-ion batteries that superceded them in the Inspiron B-130 series. Those poor things are only rated at a puny 29watt/hr, meaning that the old NiMH had 14watt/hr more battery life than the newer Li-ion packs. Since the hardware between the Inspiron 1200/2200 and the B130s didn't change much at all (most significant change was the switch from DDR to more energy efficient DDR2 ram), the B130s have noticeably less battery life. I'd be willing to bet that those competing notebooks, all with 6-cell Li-ion battery packs, have more than 43watt/hr batteries. If they would have used the Inspiron 2200's optional 65 watt/hr 8 cell Li-ion battery, the net affect would have been ~50% increase in battery life, taking the poor Inspiron from bottom of the pack to the top performer. Funny how this tidbit of information was not mentioned in the review. :roll:

For the record, I'm still using the 43 watt/hr NiMH battery, and with the Pentium M permanently underclocked/undervolted, and the screen at lowest backlight brightness, I still get ~3 usable hours of battery time. If I were to purchase the Li-ion battery for my Inspiron 1200, I should realistically get 4.5 usable hours of battery time.
December 7, 2006 2:26:23 AM

Gentlemen please,we are all professionals here.Now if you feel that this person is misleading people with false benchmarks and slander,then I suggest you contact the admins at toms hardware guide and inform them of your concerns.I can assure you they will look into it and if any false statements are found to be made by the said individual,they will promptly deal with it.Goodluck.

Dahak

primary gaming rig
AMD X2-4400+@2.4 S-939
EVGA NF4 SLI MB
2X EVGA 7800GT CO IN SLI
2X1GIG DDR IN DC MODE
WD300GIG HD
EXTREME 19IN.MONITOR 1280X1024
ACE 520WATT PSU
COOLERMASTER MINI R120

secondary gaming rig
GYGABYTE MB AGP
AMD X2 3800+ S-939
2X512 DDR IN DC MODE
X1650PRO 512 AGP
17IN.MONITOR
MAXTOR 120GIG HD
450WATT PSU
December 7, 2006 9:17:39 AM

wow, that's a relief information. so this celeron processor is good already from battery life point of view. nice.. :) 

unfortunately the same class or similar notebooks cost around US $598 here in Indonesia.
!