Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

In a quandary about AMD versus Intel

Last response: in Laptop General Discussion
Share
March 3, 2006 2:44:57 AM

Alright I am in a little bit of a quandary. I am a huge AMD Fan and all my computers have AMD Proc. I need to get a laptop for work and occasionally to play some games. Don't tell my boss though. :D  I have been waiting for the dual core laptops and Intel's Yonah is out and according to the inquirer Turion X2 will come out in May. http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30020

I have heard good things about Yonah since the Israelies have produced it and HP has a great sytem for $1500.00 with a 2.0 ghz Yonah Proc, 17.0" WXGA+ Ultra BrightView Widescreen (1440x900), 128MB NVIDIA(R) GeForce(R) Go 7400, 1.0GB DDR2 SDRAM (2x512MB), 80 GB 5400 RPM SATA Hard Drive, LightScribe 8x DVD+/-RW&CD-RW Combo w/Double Layer, & Intel(R) PRO/Wireless 3945ABG Network w/Bluetooth.

If what the inquirer site says is true, should I just go ahead and get the intel notebook? I really don't play a lot of FPS, mostly role playing games and Texas Hold Em. :lol: 

Let me know what you guys think. This is a fairly good price and I like what they offer in this system. I just wish AMD wasn't so slow in having their dual core Turion Proc out in the market.
March 6, 2006 2:28:22 AM

Whoa partner... before you go doing something like that check out www.KillerNotebooks.com.

Magnesium Chassis
Turion MT-40 processor STANDARD
1 Gig CAS 2.5 on 1 chip STANDARD
80 gig 7,200 rpm 8MB Cache Hard Drive STANDARD
a/b/g/G+ 108 MBps Internal Wireless STANDARD
8x Dual Layer CD & DVD Burner STANDARD
x700 128 MB PCI Express video card (x1600 256 MB coming in March)
15.4" Glossy TruBrite Widescreen

Do NOT buy an Intel! That is just investing in 32 bit obsolete junk! A year and a half from now you will be saying,"Why did I buy this? I can't even run 64 bit programs!" Programs have to be written specifically to take advantage of dual core architecture, the only thing dual core processors do on notebooks is eat up battery life.

How many times are you running a virus scan when you are gaming or using other programs? A Turion MT-40 3900+ desktop equivalent can eat 3 and 4 apps at a time for breakfast. If you look on Intel's page it flat out says, "Core duo is 25% faster than it's single core counterpart." I can gauranty a Turion MT-40 is more than 50% faster than it's Intel counterpart so where's the advantage of a 32 bit dual core?

March 6, 2006 3:18:25 AM

I've been a fan of AMD for awhile, but I have to say I like Intel's laptops overall. Yes they aren't 64bit enabled, but even with 64-bit coming to OS's last year I haven't seen 1 true 64-bit app. I have seen 1 game or 2, but its a long raod ahead. ALso, to the best of my knowledge Intel based laptops have longer battery life and are on par with AMD performance. Part of the advantage for Intel is the use of DDR2 and such, but that is just one component among many.

Don't call me an Intel fanbuy, just look at my rig hehe :) . Turion was a big step forward for AMD, dont get me wrong but I personaly have to give the edge to Intel still.
Related resources
March 6, 2006 3:44:45 AM

Well if you check out my page, look at the Specifications Menu then the Memory and the Processor pages and you may change your mind about the mobile Intel processor.

Just because there aren't that many 64 bit apps out now, you have to figure with Intel going to 64 bit with their Mermon chipset they are going to appear like ants at a picnic soon afterwards.

March 6, 2006 3:59:16 AM

I've read up on both architectures and AMD has thier strong points with integrated memory controller but its still single channel. Also the Intel chip has the capability to literaly almost turn off one core if your just perusing the internet and not doing anything, but fire up another app and both cores come alive. Also, if im not mistaken, the AMD chip cannot turn off its internal cache where as dothan and Yohan can, reducing power consumption. I would love to see Turion X2 against Yohan, but sadly we can't see it yet. OH well
March 6, 2006 6:02:58 PM


AMD has dual channel and the bandwidth of the AMD's are much higher, with lower latency with their onboard controller. (one of many memory articles) I think a lot of the marketing hype about it being not that big of a deal centers more around AMD having a patent on the technology more than reality.

I mean Intel would have us believe that:
The onboard memory controller means nothing.
The 1,600 fsb mean nothing (although they are constantly trying to boost their fsb.)
64 bit architecture means nothing (yet they take AMD's 64 bit code verbatim for EM64T.)
We had heard for a long time that the greater size of AMD's cache meant nothing, yet Intel boost theirs to 2 MB and suddenly it is all important because theirs is larger.

Intel releases a 3.2 640 class desktop processor, then they release the extreme edition for booku bucks, which is nothing more than a 640 with an 800 mhz front side bus and larger cache. When AMD does it Intel claims, "There is little benefit." when they do it it is "extreme".
March 6, 2006 7:08:10 PM

NO question INtel has sucked it up real nice with thier desktop procs since prescott, of that there is little conjecture. However, mobile parts still hold their own. Intel has been raising thier FSB to increase memory bandwidth and reduce latency among other things. I agree AMD has an advantage there, but when under light load Intel shines and AMD falls behind. When put under load the tables even up and AMD squeeks out ahead (by a mere 5-10min if I'm not mistaken). The key lies in Intel's ability to turn off all but 1/64th of the L2 cache (last I heard, it may be diffrent in Yonah) and also send 1 core into the C4 power state which virtually draws no power.

So again, yes AMD's are great in gaming and last a smidge longer under load but when it boils down to light usage (say note taking which is what i would do 85% of the time) Intel trumps AMD. Compromises on both sides, and I have always believed that so for me I give the advantage to Intel in the mobile arena FOR NOW :p 

Side Note: I know not to believe Intel's marketing, nor do I believ what little marketing I get from AMD. I judge things for myself depending on what I use them for, so I count myself among the intelligent who recognize selective disclosure in marketing (any company not just Intel or AMD).

PS. i appreciate the respect this discussion has taken place with, no personal flagerant remarks :) 
March 6, 2006 10:36:07 PM

Thanks for this discussion into the value of AMD versus Intell. I also am an AMD fanboy, but after reading many things on diffrent sites and giving the link to the inquirer on the story behind Yonah and Turion X2, I am still leaning the Yonah route for the laptop. I understand about the 64 bit extension that AMD has, but I figure I can use my desktop for that. My concern is the performance though of the dual core proc and it appears that Turion will not be able to beat Yonah if the configuration is correct.

Understand that I value everyone's opinions because there is much merit in both sides, that is why I would like others to comment on this thread and give me your reasoning for your choice of processor for your dual core laptop. Thanks again to everyone joining this disussion.
March 6, 2006 10:38:13 PM

Quote:
Thanks for this discussion into the value of AMD versus Intell. I also am an AMD fanboy, but after reading many things on diffrent sites and giving the link to the inquirer on the story behind Yonah and Turion X2, I am still leaning the Yonah route for the laptop. I understand about the 64 bit extension that AMD has, but I figure I can use my desktop for that. My concern is the performance though of the dual core proc and it appears that Turion will not be able to beat Yonah if the configuration is correct.

Understand that I value everyone's opinions because there is much merit in both sides, that is why I would like others to comment on this thread and give me your reasoning for your choice of processor for your dual core laptop. Thanks again to everyone joining this disussion.


Thats what we are here for, to share our knowledge/viewpoint. Either way you go it will be a good laptop, its just a question of which is best for you.
March 7, 2006 12:35:58 AM

My 8 cell battery lasts about 3 hours under light load because the Turion Mt series only uses 25 watts. I believe that the most frugal Pentium-M uses 24 watts. I am not expecting to get more than 2 1/2 hours from my notebook myself, but I certainly do like its ability to multitask and handle the gaming requirements when needed.

Just under normal usage it feels "snapier" than the Pentium M's (Dell D610 2.0 Ghz 1 Gig, ASUS 2.13 Ghz 2 Gigs, Ibm lenova) that I have had/used. I had a customer tell me that he went head to head against a Sony P-M machine with a guy at work. They were ripping DVD movies and he said that the Sony was basically locked up and could only do the DVD encoding while he was able to surf the web etc, and still came out at a 3-2 ratio of movies burned.

That to me is what I do it for. I want my customers to be happy with what they get and stay happy. I have a real hard time selling 32 bit sytems and KNOW that they are going to be obsolete in a few years. That's me, everyone else in entitled to their opinion concerning AMD and Intel.
March 7, 2006 1:51:34 AM

As long as your customers are happy then you are doing your job :) 
March 7, 2006 2:01:26 AM

Killernotebooks you stated in your reply that the Turion is a good proc for multitasking, but I am a little confused. The only dual core cpu for the notebooks is the Intell Yonah, which again has 1Mg of L2 Cache and while the Turion X2 is still not out for dual core, it is said to have only 512 Mg cache. So with that in mind how do you think it will out perform an Israeli reconfigured chip? Bear in mind this isn't your average sorry P4 or Pentium M cpu. The Israeli's did a marvelous job re-doing this CPU to out perform others in the notebooks class.
March 7, 2006 2:11:37 AM

Now that ATI has the x1600 card out for AMD notebooks I hope they have their sights set on an x3200 dual GPU mobility card. ASUS has a system that can use onboard graphics for kicking around and 6600 GT (I believe it had 128 MB) for gaming... which is really a cool idea but why did they stop at teh 6600?

How about onboard graphics chip for kickin' around town then step into a phone booth... rip open your shirt and you have an x3200 with 512 MB RAM and 3 minutes of battery life!

March 7, 2006 2:56:20 AM

Yea dual core, dual core, dual core... all praise the dual core.

The current Turion ML-44 has a 1 MB cache and runs at 2.4 GHz, but it started life as a lowely ML-42 with only 512 kb cache.
The MT-40 runs at 2.2 GHz. Guys, these are Pentium 4 - 4 Ghz equivalent processors! listen to what you are saying... you are so caught up in this marketing hype that these chipmakers would have you believe you can't write an email and listen to an MP3 unless you have a dual core processor. I can run more apps than I can keep straight in my head without a problem.

Who cares if the Israeli's reconfigured Yonah? What differnce does that make? They "reconfigured" the Phantom, but that doesn't make it an F-16. The X2 desktop trounces Intel's desktop chip, it is far more advanced and innovative, why would I think that 512 kb of cache per core would turn the tables? Maybe they called it "Yonah" because the Turion X2 is the big fish that's going to swallow it up.

AMD more than likely spent a good piece of change on R&D for this chip... I'm sure they know what they are doing. BUT, just like my post today somewhere on this forum, "What is a chipmaker that makes the perfect chip that doesn't need to be upgraded?" OUT OF BUSINESS.

They know they are going to sell a ton of 512 kb cache chips, then "OH MY GOD... WE FIGURED OUT HOW TO PUT 1 MB CACHE'S ON THE CHIPS [insert hype here]"

3 more months later, "2MB SHARED CACHE NOW A REALITY!!!!" Unbelievable Performance you MUST have! Can't you just see the headlines?

New benchmarks proclaim the 2 MB cache dominates the OLD CRAPPY chip YOU have Then in reality it is like a 2% difference or something, but they "curb-fit" the tests to make it much more of course (that means tweaked to look better over a narrow range that exists for about a nanosecond once a lifetime in the real world) to say whatever they want.

We still have to go back to the fact that Microsoft is releasing their Vaporware Longhorn/Vista 64 bit this year and Intel will have 64 bit (nb)processors by then and LOOK OUT if you think you aren't going to hear the spin doctors then!

I re-read this post and it kind of sounds like I am AMPed Up, but I am not... I am just messin' around. The bottom line is that if Yonah or Mermon or the Turion X2 is really that much better it will be reverse engineered and stolen and that will propogate to the other camp and YOU and I will reap the benefits and be able to yak on endlessly in forums about whos weiner is bigger.

March 7, 2006 3:03:03 AM

Mmm, marketing.

Yes, Intel markets. Just like you are marketing. Do you think Intel would come out and say that the competiton is better?

I'm sure 99% of the people here know not to listen to first party benchmarks (that's why we come to sites like Tom's Hardware). Preformance and price are not the only factors in the mobile segment, battery life is too and Intel's architechture is ahead of AMD in this area.
March 7, 2006 3:12:37 AM

Yea, the difference is, I can build on any platform I want. If I thought Intel was betterI'd use 'em.

Intel changes so much stuff that a desktop you buy in January will probably not be worth upgrading a year later. You will be lucky if there isn't a new slot configuration, memory type, or some other essentially worthless dohicky that makes you HAVE to upgrade. How long has AMD been able to stretch DDR3200 memory? Cause Intel had Rambus and DDR2400, 533, 667 and that hurts consumers. How long has AMD and nVidia had SLi equiped motherboards, how long have they had the 939 and 754 chipsets?

I don't think I have "marketed" in these last replies at all, in fact I have a Super Squirrel and a guy riding a weiner dog to lighten it up a bit. Am I chanting KillerNotebooks or am I talking about intel and AMD? I guess we have to agree to disagree, and I think you are more pissed about the F-16 comment than anything else.
March 7, 2006 3:14:05 AM

Funny part about that is you would barely get booted up and into the splash screen of a game before your laptop died lol. Oh the things imaginations can do. While we are at it lets add in a display that has 2 hidden screens and one comes out each side for a portable 3 monitor setup. Now that would be amazing. 8O

Actually if we address the true problem of our power needs its Li-ion batteries but that gets beyond my techinal expertise. What I do know is that they are limited in capacity (as is everything) and they are trying for a new tech jsut forgot what its called.
March 7, 2006 3:26:06 AM

You know another thing is this 2 GB of RAM limitation these notebooks have. What's with that?

How about 4 gigs with (2) 2 Gig chips and have 2 gigs for system and 2 gigs for a RAM drive for the OS? They could boost the existing battery life by not having to hit the freakin' hard drive so much.

Get the New Gigabit flash memory hard drives out and save even more power there by not having to spin up the drive even further.

Damn Fly, me and you is figurin' out all the worlds problems tonight!
March 7, 2006 3:43:01 AM

You are marketing for AMD. The desktop upgrade point is moot, we're not talking about desktops. :p  I am typing this on a 4400+, don't think I'm an Intel fanboy.

For what Codeblue009 wants, Intel makes more sense because he'll be at low loads more often than high. However, this point is moot if he's plugged into the wall most of the time.

On a side note, why dual core? What RPGs do you plan on playing? Perhaps I am off in the wrong direction and battery life isn't as much of a concern to you as I am making it? The uses you've stated make me start to think that possibly AMD might be a better choice, as nothing in your list needs dual core, even if you're playing Texas Hold 'Em while playing that RPG and surfing the net on an Intel or AMD processor.
March 7, 2006 4:12:52 AM

How about dual logging a MMORPG like LIneage 2, try and do that on anything but a dual core well. That game is nuts, been at it for 2 years now and my trusty venice and 7800 gtx still have issues with the game bc of the amount of ppl on it at once. Don't even get me started when a Chronicle comes out, there are 10's of thousands of ppl hitting the server at once, LAG FTW!!!! lol.

So lets see our list now includes:
Folding displays
Dual Cores
Dual GPU
Bigger battery
And...

Lets add hybrid hard drive to the list. Killer, the Hybrid hard drive is specificly designed for what you said, reduce hard drive access. The idea is incorporating a non-volitile amount of flash memory into the hard drive as a buffer between system ram and data storage. For arguements sake lets say its 2GB (idk what it will be so dont quote me on that), so if your browsing the internet there is no way your Buffer (as i feel like calling it) will get overloaded even with cookies and whatever nonsene you pull out of your ass. What does this do? No HDD access = significantly less power drain and therfore more battery life. Also, as soon as you hit that buffer's limit your hard drive kicks in like normal and writes/deletes as it normally would until the buffer is cleared and then it spins down again. It's a wonderful idea that I really hope makes it mainstream, and fast. Last I heard its being specificly designed to work with Vista.

Its along the same idea as a hybrid car, why use gas when at low speeds you can use regenerative braking to power your car? Why not use non-volitile flash to severely curtail HDD access in light load situations? In each case the consumer wins :) 

OH as a "for shits and giggles" addition, I want THX certified speakers on my laptop. Just imagine your walking into a meeting and all of a sudden you hear 50 Cent blarring from this itty bitty laptop of your collegues. (in case you missed who 50 cent is, just insert generic obnoxious novelty rap songs in as you please)
March 7, 2006 4:22:54 AM

I hate to sound like i am "marketing" but we have a 17" notebook with 4 speakers PLUS subwoofer built in. Is that completely ridiculous or what?

What about the 4 gigs with 2 for RAM drive idea until they get those drives out? I mean this is a reality right now with a 2Gb notebook memory chip and a bios upgrade.
March 7, 2006 4:53:22 AM

Quote:
I hate to sound like i am "marketing" but we have a 17" notebook with 4 speakers PLUS subwoofer built in. Is that completely ridiculous or what?

What about the 4 gigs with 2 for RAM drive idea until they get those drives out? I mean this is a reality right now with a 2Gb notebook memory chip and a bios upgrade.


I've heard of those kind of notebook sound system, and don't get me wrong they soudn really nice, but there is something about being able to say hey I have THX speakers in my laptop wth do you have? LOL. Its an image thing, and I have heard nothing but great reviews of the 4.1 systems in laptops. There was a review posted just today on THG Mobility Guru about an Alienware that had, you guessed it, 4 speakers and a sub and they loved it. Its amazing how much attention laptops are getting these days, I really enjoy it.

As for the 2Gb RAM temp solution, I think the problem lies in teh fact that RAM is volitile. Volitile in the sense it loses data when it loses power (just in case you didn't know ). So yes it would work but the instant that your battery ran out, or that you were hit by a power surge or outage you would be hosed. Thats the entire reason I stay away from RAM disk drives.

I experimented with them back in the day (3 years ago heh) when I first got 2GB of ram. This was also back when Medal Of Honor was the most demanding game around, and I found the risk of data loss and rembering to back up and reload the data and the configuration options was honestly a pain in the ass. So yes in theory it would work well, but its a high risk manuver if you put anything important on that RAM disk drive.

I am a vertible fountain of useless knowledge hehe, all in good spirits.
March 7, 2006 8:46:28 AM

You have raised my interests some more with this discussion. I will be using the laptop for Photoshop, Acrobat 7.0 Professional, Access, Excel, RPG and maybe some Medal of Honor. Call of Duty probably won't play as well on this laptop then on my AMD 64 X2 4400+. I am not concerned with battery life. I will have my laptop mostly plugged in, unless I am on one of my flights to Russia or the Ukraine. Then I can always read my book or listen to my IPOD to keep me company. :D 

Perfomance wise I am not sure that any sites list the Turion ahead of the Yonah. I am mostly concerned with performance and value for the laptop. I will only go Intell if the value and the performance is there. Again I am building my Dream Machine now and it has an ASUS A8N-SLI NForce4 deluxe board, Athlon 64 X2 4400, Zalman CNPS 7000B ALCU Heatsink, 2 GB of Corsair TwinX2048-3200C2PT, EVGA GeForce 7800 GTX 256MB, 2 WD Caviar SE 16 320 GB SATA 3G & a Cooler Master RP RS-550-ACLY Power Supply. I already have a sexy plexy 716-A Burner and Audigy Sound card. So I am an AMD Fan but Yonah sounds really good to me now, especially since I need a laptop right now. So now what do you guys and girls think?
March 7, 2006 12:44:45 PM

From a preformance/price standpoint, YES Yonah beats the Turion because it is dual core. However, you won't need dual core unless you plan on playing two CPU intensive games at once, like as stated earlier dual-logging Lineage 2.

You see, games can't take advantage of dual-core because of how they're programmed. You are right, your 4400+ will be able to play Call of Duty better, but that's because of a beefier video card and more RAM.
March 7, 2006 1:05:20 PM

If you need a laptop right now, I still say Yonah (again personal preference). I think dual cores like photoshop (correct me if im in error). As for your dream rig (just to throw in my 2 cents), why not go for the X2 4200+ or 4600+ and overclock. The manchester core has significantly less transistors due to the smaller cache enabling it to OC more with less heat. Just a thought :) . however if your not an OC man then shoot as high as you can affor, as always lol

Edit: Don't get me started on the new iPod, I don't like it. Now if you have a 4G or earlier iPod then those are the bomb. It is really just how thing and fragile the 5G seems to be. I acctually went Creative Zen Microphoto for my iPod replacement, but thats a whole nother discussion.
March 7, 2006 1:56:04 PM

Quote:
But as we saw in our original article, at 2.0GHz, the Core Duo T2500 just isn't able to offer performance comparable to the Athlon 64 X2 at the same speed. It is worth noting that L2 cache size doesn't really make a difference here to the X2 at all, just clock speed. Thanks to the Athlon 64's on-die memory controller, the architecture is inherently less sensitive to cache size than more conventional designs that rely on an external memory controller.


As far as Yonah beating the Turion:
Ok, I am going to take a different approach here.

Yonah, is awesome! It is the BOMB, it is all powerful and dual core and has 3 rows of teeth like a great white and claws like daggers (probably made of Vibranium). Little pieces Turion's are just sticking half digested out of its poop in the yard.

Since I just succomed to the freaking shock and awe of the Yonah I have a question, "How long is this BEAST going to last you?"

Riddle me this, "How fast is this going to be on Vista, or 64 bit Photoshop, or Office or any of the other things you are going to want to use while this system is still alive and kicking in a year and a half? When all the "benchmarks" say, "We have left the cave! Hail the new era of 64 bit computing! This pie chart shows 64 bit processors slaughterhouse everything you bought 20 minutes ago!" Then in really fine subliminal text print it says, "I can't believe you are still using a 32 bit machine... you suck"
March 7, 2006 2:24:29 PM

You're comparing apples to oranges. Desktop CPUs to laptop CPUs?

Actually, now that you mention it I have heard about Photoshop being multi-threaded.
March 7, 2006 2:27:09 PM

Apples to oranges? a 3800+ X2 is comperable to what they are saying the Turion X2 will be. The point is the cache and how it isn't an issue which is what were were talking about on page 1.
March 7, 2006 2:31:50 PM

That is what "they" are saying, but Turion X2's aren't out yet.

By the by, who is "they"?
March 7, 2006 5:11:54 PM

Superfly I was not informed on the 4200 & 4600 as a suitable Proc for my rig, so I bought the X2 4400 instead. I saw that it had more L2 cache of 1 Mg as opposed to I believe 512 kb of cache for the two other proc's. I wish I had done more research into the Opteron Procs because it seems to me that most everyone here uses that as the processor of choice. :) 

I have a shuffle now and I am buying the 4 Gig Nano. I was almost leaning to the 30 Gig IPOD but I believe you saved me from my folly. I was not sure of this because the Nano uses I believe flash memory and was not sure if the 30 Gig had a better memory storage device. Thanks for the input. :) 

So I think then what the consensus here is that a dual core laptop for me might be overkill, except while I am using Photoshop. I think the suggestion is to go for a high end single core AMD Turion as opposed to wait for the Turion X2 to come out. There was only one person who advocated for the Yonah Proc and that was you Superfly. I appreciate your input and reasoning, especially since we are both living in Texas. :D 

Well the Turion X2 is still about 4-6 weeks away and I am thinking that the push for dual core is here. Applications such as Photoshop do utilize two processors and video editing that I do on some occasion also can use this kind of performance. I forgot I have to do some for presentations at times at work. So if I am patient enough I will wait to see if the Turion X2 will out perform Yonah. I especially like that ATI came with a new video card for the laptop, but HP doesn't carry it yet in their configuration. I might look you up Killernotebook and see if you have what I am looking for. Thanks again to everyone for helping and responding to this thread. :D 
March 7, 2006 6:24:24 PM

Thats why we have boards, to learn form each other. I know just spending an hour a day in the forums I almost learn more than I do in some of my IS classes (lets not go there LOL).
March 9, 2006 4:08:51 AM

MAN that stress test was AMAZING!
18 days of max-load testing? My laptop would've...well, MELTED, had it gone through that kinda ordeal lol.
Sorta humorous to see the Intel chip need replacement parts and rebooted 4 times, while the AMD just cruised along.
March 9, 2006 3:25:23 PM

Yea, I think that test pretty much says... oh, IT ALL!

IN the Feb 21st edition of PC Magazine Dvorak wrote and article about Intel and their marketing and buzz words they use.

I guess Intel dropped, "Intel Inside" and instead are now using "Leap Ahead." It was pretty funny that he said,
Leap Ahead... of what? Of AMD?
Maybe they should change the slogan to "Pretend to Leap Ahead".
Amen to that.

March 13, 2006 4:50:30 PM

Centrino vs. Turion

Quote:

Conclusions
From a performance perspective, it's clear that the Turion 64 is the winner. By my count, the Pentium M was faster in only five of the tests, and one of those (the hardware OpenGL test in Cinebench) was probably due to graphics drivers. The rest were either a toss-up or a win for the Turion 64. The other thing that struck me about the results was that even in the tests the Pentium M did win, its margin of victory was fairly small. A number of the Turion 64 wins, however, were by an impressively large margin.
April 4, 2006 4:19:44 PM

I have used Intel single and dual core as well as Turion processors and X2 desktops. There is absolutely NO WAY you can compare a 2.26 Pentium M to a 2.2 GHz Turion. It isn’t even remotely close, but hey, use them both and you be the judge... let's move on to this core duo.

Talk about a marketing phenomena... core due it is just that… marketing. I tried a 1.66 core duo and it doesn’t cut the muster. I have no idea how much money Intel is unloading on marketing, but if I were them I would be freaking praying that Conroe and Merom live up to all the initial claims and that AMD doesn't make any new advances by then to throw more dirt in the hole Intel is enjoying at this point.

Why would the notebook arena be any different then the desktop arena? The X2 dual core desktop humiliates the Intel class dual cores. Intel makes all sorts of wild claims about AMD's technology not stacking up to their own, and downplaying the features AMD processors support, but when Intel's R&D finally catches up they start implementing the things AMD is doing that were previously stated as junk. Quote:
NGMA chips can process more instructions per clock cycle than their predecessors, take advantage of larger amounts of cache memory, and route instructions more intelligently through the central processing unit (CPU). This will allow Intel to retake the performance lead currently held by the AMD64 architecture without resorting to techonology similar to AMD's integrated memory controller or point-to-point interconnects, said Mooly Eden, general manager of Intel's mobile platforms group.
So Intel's own general manager of mobile platforms admits that AMD has the performance lead... interesting. Reading that statement it appears as if the onboard memory controller that Intel has previously said makes "insignifcant performance gains" in reality is putting Intel to the tap. Quote:
Intel executives, such as Chief Technology Officer Justin Rattner, have talked about pursuing integrated memory controllers for chips toward the end of the decade, but the company has not shared any specific plans.
Intel's talking about a lot of things that are "going to be, but sounds like right now they are tapping out. What's going to happen when AMD moves to DDR2?

Why if Intel is so great didn't we have 64 bit computing 3 years ago? AMD had it but Intel couldn't figure it out... so they downplayed it. They stagnated the market because no one wanted to move forward without (at the time) the dominant market share player. Why did a company with so much market share and so much money for R&D get taken downtown in the desktop market ... then the server market ... Quote:
The Opteron chip has lifted AMD's share of the x86 server processor market from virtually zero a few years ago to 14.3 percent in the fourth quarter of 2005, according to IDC.
then the notebook market? If Intel is so great why are they hemorraging market share?

Quote:
Strike three for Intel
By Michael Kanellos and Tom Krazit
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: March 3, 2006, 1:20 PM PST

Intel warned on Friday that its revenue for the first quarter would come in at between $8.7 billion and $9.1 billion, roughly $500 million lower than estimates the company issued in January. The Santa Clara, Calif.-based chipmaker cited a weak market and a "slight" market share loss.

AMD's surge can be seen most strongly in the U.S. retail market, which accounts for about 9 percent of global PC shipments. In the first seven weeks of 2006, AMD's share in desktops in that area climbed to 81.5 percent, while Intel's has slid to 18.5 percent, Baker said. That's almost a complete reversal of their typical relative positions.


Intel is getting to be like Microsoft... big claims then delays and striped down versions of what they initially presented. The really annoying thing about Intel is instead of doing it right they rush to market and then change their stuff a million times, change the name of everything 5 million times and hype their stuff and throw marketing and advertising dollars out 10 million times more than AMD.

How long has AMD made socket 939 last? How long have they made DDR memory last? When they design something it is desighned right so they don't burn their customer base Quote:
AMD will introduce support for DDR2 (double data rate 2) memory along with a new socket technology called AM2 in the second half of the year. That will allow system builders to drop quad-core processors into the same chipsets for upcoming dual-core chips, he said.


Why don't you speculate on how much more advanced the computer industry would be right now had Intel not been a bloated pig stonewalling the industry?

Now everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I am not going to try to change your mind. I am going to ask one question... Of everything you said above... how fast will the core-duo Intel be when everyone is using 64 bit O.S. & programs? and I will leave you with this quote,
Quote:
As might be expected, Advanced Micro Devices doesn't think much of Intel's performance claims for its upcoming Conroe and Merom products.

"It's driven by the fact that they can't talk about their current products, because everybody knows their current products aren't very good,"
April 20, 2006 7:13:45 PM

I think there are a few things that need to be cleared up. The Yonah CPU sounds great, it maybe faster and to the market first. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have been hearing about this CPU for atleast 3-5 months. And I am just starting to see them being offered, with the expection of Apple. I mean like one person stated that Dell is the largest selling the US, and I know people I work with who have ordered new laptops with the new CoreDuo Yonah and they aren't expected to ship until 1st or 2nd week of may. Now Intel really doesn't have much of lead and should be scared of AMD's Turion x2 for may reasons, AMD has may advantages over intel, but when you look at the two processors on paper you would want think Intel has more power in its cpu. Not really true, the L2 cache is different lower on the AMD at 512KB and Intel at 1MB per core. The simple reason for this is, AMD has the memory controller on board, making it easier and quicker for AMD to trasmit data between the cpu and RAM. Intel on the other hand depends on cache to support data flow since their memory controller is slower due to the extra stops the data has to make.

Now if AMD delievers their Turion X2 on the date they say and have systems ready for purchase, Intel will have trouble getting their Yonah the distance they want in the market. AMD has delievered some rock soild mobile technology. If I had to place my money on anything it would be AMD leading an ever growing mobile segment of gaming enthusiast. I can see mobile computers soon matching the gaming desktop setups.
!