Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Pentium M/integrated wireless benefits

Last response: in Laptops & Notebooks
Share
May 18, 2004 2:27:39 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Could someone explain to me the phenomenon behind Pentium M
processors? They use less battery power. Is that about it, cuz it
seems like thats it. Yeah it appears like they package wireless
capability into these computers, but can you not do the same thing
with a $50 internal card? I just don't understand why I'd pay so much
more for something that doesn't seem worth it. What about the speed?
I assume they are measured the same, so why would I get a 1.5ghz vs a
3ghz P4 for around the same price? I just dont understand the
benefits.

Jeff
May 18, 2004 8:08:15 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On 18 May 2004 10:27:39 -0700, jeff6523@hotmail.com (Jeff) wrote:

>Could someone explain to me the phenomenon behind Pentium M
>processors?

Thinner, lighter notebook.

Doesn't run as hot.

Longer battery life (up to 5 hours).

Integrated wireless (no antenna sticking out).

1.6GHz Pentium-M performs about the same as a 2.4GHz Pentium-4.
May 18, 2004 11:08:38 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

I never heard of an antenna sticking out of a notebook. I thought
they were all internal or pcmcia cards. That speed/performance rating
is really stupid. I can't believe they'd run at a different than
stated speed. So basically, even for a power user, unless you want a
thin notebook Pentium M's are worthless?


DaveR <NOSPAM_drubin@NOSPAM_i-2000.com> wrote in message news:<q2yqQKbwQpJdWKBDWojW8srXYfnE@4ax.com>...
> On 18 May 2004 10:27:39 -0700, jeff6523@hotmail.com (Jeff) wrote:
>
> >Could someone explain to me the phenomenon behind Pentium M
> >processors?
>
> Thinner, lighter notebook.
>
> Doesn't run as hot.
>
> Longer battery life (up to 5 hours).
>
> Integrated wireless (no antenna sticking out).
>
> 1.6GHz Pentium-M performs about the same as a 2.4GHz Pentium-4.
Related resources
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 19, 2004 2:18:31 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> 1.6GHz Pentium-M performs about the same as a 2.4GHz Pentium-4.

Depends on the benchmark.

My own CMS content creation software runs on a 1.6 GHz Centrino
faster than on a 3.06 GHz P4 HT


--
Roland Mösl
http://www.pege.org Clear targets for a confused civilization
http://web-design-suite.com Web Design starts at the search engine
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 19, 2004 4:01:28 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

jeff6523@hotmail.com (Jeff) wrote in
news:D 7256652.0405181808.2c40da2c@posting.google.com:

> I never heard of an antenna sticking out of a notebook. I thought

Any PCMCIA Wireless card will stick out of PCMCIA slot, its antenna part
in particular. Of course, this is not the case with builtin mini-PCI
Wireless.

> they were all internal or pcmcia cards. That speed/performance rating
> is really stupid. I can't believe they'd run at a different than
> stated speed. So basically, even for a power user, unless you want a
> thin notebook Pentium M's are worthless?

Well, you may not like this performance rating comparison but that's how
it is in reality.

If you were not out of the loop recently, you should've heard news from
Intel regarding their processor plans.
Pentium-M is making its debut in desktop systems now. Intel abandons
Tejas and Jayhawk (if I remember the names correctly) and is going to
stick to variations of Pentium-M core for future desktop processors,
including multiple-Pentium-M-core chips. Not completely of course - I
hear 4GHz Prescott is still in the plans. But you get the trend...

That proves that Pentium-M is well worth it.

Also regarding performance rating, did you know that Intel no longer uses
GHz marking for CPUs? Know why? Pentium-M proved that GHz are not the
real measure. So that performance rating is not stupid at all.

Alexei
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 19, 2004 5:23:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Alexei Boukirev" <aboukirev@blah.ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:Xns94EE9582CB7aboukirevblahamerite@216.196.105.138...
> jeff6523@hotmail.com (Jeff) wrote in
> news:D 7256652.0405181808.2c40da2c@posting.google.com:
> >
> If you were not out of the loop recently, you should've heard news from
> Intel regarding their processor plans.
> Pentium-M is making its debut in desktop systems now. Intel abandons
> Tejas and Jayhawk (if I remember the names correctly) and is going to
> stick to variations of Pentium-M core for future desktop processors,
> including multiple-Pentium-M-core chips. Not completely of course - I
> hear 4GHz Prescott is still in the plans. But you get the trend...
>
> That proves that Pentium-M is well worth it.
>


Did Intel officially announce this? I've been looking for information about
this and can't find the press release on their web site. Do you have a link
to these announcements?

Thanks.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 19, 2004 7:29:38 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Jeff <jeff6523@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I never heard of an antenna sticking out of a notebook.
> I thought they were all internal or pcmcia cards.

_ALL_ PC slot wireless NICs have an antenna that protrudes from the laptop!

> That speed/performance rating is really stupid.

Blame Intel.

> I can't believe they'd run at a different than stated speed.

No one said they did. What was said is that due to improvements in internal
architecture a PentiumM processor running at 1.7GHz is comparable to a P4
processor running at 2.8GHz to 3.2GHz depending on who's doing the testing.

> So basically, even for a power user, unless you want a
> thin notebook Pentium M's are worthless?

No one said that either.

Regards,

James

Checkout the NEW Thinkpad Forums: http://forum.thinkpads.com
May 19, 2004 7:29:39 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

I meant antenna in the desktop nic sense, ie a long thin "antenna."
Maybe your inputs would be more helpful if they weren't so
condescending. You still did not provide any reason that M's are
worthwhile. A thin laptop? I'd rather save my money. Even if they
are the new direction for Intel, there is no evident reason they are
worth the extra money over a P4.



"JHEM" <James@ESAD_SPAMMERS.thinkpads.com> wrote
>
> _ALL_ PC slot wireless NICs have an antenna that protrudes from the laptop!
>
> > That speed/performance rating is really stupid.
>
> Blame Intel.
>
> > I can't believe they'd run at a different than stated speed.
>
> No one said they did. What was said is that due to improvements in internal
> architecture a PentiumM processor running at 1.7GHz is comparable to a P4
> processor running at 2.8GHz to 3.2GHz depending on who's doing the testing.
>
> > So basically, even for a power user, unless you want a
> > thin notebook Pentium M's are worthless?
>
> No one said that either.
>
> Regards,
>
> James
>
> Checkout the NEW Thinkpad Forums: http://forum.thinkpads.com
May 19, 2004 7:30:05 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:18:31 +0200, Roland Mösl <founder@pege.org>
wrote:

>
>> 1.6GHz Pentium-M performs about the same as a 2.4GHz Pentium-4.
>
>Depends on the benchmark.

That is true. The Pentium-M has double the cache of the Pentium-4 so
it can outperform on some applications.

The 1.8GHz and higher models will have 2MB cache, 4 times the
Pentium-4.

The next generation desktop chip from Intel will be based on the
Pentium-M core. Clearly it is their more mature design.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 19, 2004 7:30:06 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

DaveR <NOSPAM_drubin@NOSPAM_i-2000.com> wrote in
news:D rWrQOBNnjSYMiprfZezAejJ8oXT@4ax.com:

> The 1.8GHz and higher models will have 2MB cache, 4 times the
> Pentium-4.

Except Intel did not increase associativity (bitwise) of the cache, so
there is little actual gain in Dothan vs. Banias. A pity.

Alexei
May 19, 2004 7:32:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On 18 May 2004 19:08:38 -0700, jeff6523@hotmail.com (Jeff) wrote:

>I never heard of an antenna sticking out of a notebook. I thought
>they were all internal or pcmcia cards. That speed/performance rating
>is really stupid. I can't believe they'd run at a different than
>stated speed.

It's quite simple. Clock speed is only one factor of a chip's
performance. You can't compare clock speeds of Pentium-M to Pentium-4
because it is apples and oranges. The Pentium-M architecture is such
that it can outperform Pentium-4 at lower clock speeds. That's the way
it was designed, so it consumes less power and dissipates less heat.

Your confusion on this issue is exactly the reason why Intel is
abandoning the use of clock speeds in their processor names, and
changing to generic numerical identifiers instead, like Model 200,
Model 400, etc.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 19, 2004 11:04:22 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

jeff6523@hotmail.com (Jeff) wrote in
news:D 7256652.0405191358.736cf6b2@posting.google.com:

> You still did not provide any reason that M's are
> worthwhile. A thin laptop? I'd rather save my money. Even if they
> are the new direction for Intel, there is no evident reason they are
> worth the extra money over a P4.

how about 5-6 hours per battery as opposed to 2-3 hours with a P4? how
about a cooler running laptop that has less chance of overheating and/or
being very uncomfortable on your lap? how about faster and more powerful
processing power?

if none of those work for you, heck, go get a PII!
May 20, 2004 8:21:24 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On 19 May 2004 14:58:02 -0700, jeff6523@hotmail.com (Jeff) wrote:

>I meant antenna in the desktop nic sense, ie a long thin "antenna."
>Maybe your inputs would be more helpful if they weren't so
>condescending. You still did not provide any reason that M's are
>worthwhile. A thin laptop? I'd rather save my money. Even if they
>are the new direction for Intel, there is no evident reason they are
>worth the extra money over a P4.

Weight and battery life are often very important specifications for
notebook buyers. After all, they are supposed to be portable.

If you don't mind lugging around an extra 3 pounds, and charging the
battery after 1 hour instead of 4, then by all means, save your money
and buy a P4-based laptop. Or save even more money and buy a Celeron.
In the end it's your needs that should determine what you buy, not
whether or not something is worth extra money.
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
a b D Laptop
May 21, 2004 9:35:00 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Jeff <jeff6523@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I meant antenna in the desktop nic sense, ie a long thin "antenna."

But that isn't what you wrote! "I never heard of an antenna sticking out of
a notebook", meaning they're all flush with the laptop case.

> Maybe your inputs would be more helpful if they weren't so
> condescending.

Condescending?

> You still did not provide any reason that M's are
> worthwhile. A thin laptop? I'd rather save my money. Even if they
> are the new direction for Intel, there is no evident reason they are
> worth the extra money over a P4.

You're right, we're all wrong, don't buy one.
!