Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is PM better than P4?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 7, 2005 4:58:05 AM

I have been reading the notebook section. It seems to be the general opinion that Pentium M architecture is superior even to P4 HT. Does that mean it's worthwile to get Notebooks if you do not upgrade often?
I was thinking of upgrading my celeron 2.4 to P4 3.2 processor for my gaming desktop and also to get a notebook for my work.But if what i mentioned earlier is true then i think i'd rather spend the extra 400 bucks on notebook for better features.

Please recommend.
thanks

More about : question

March 7, 2005 5:47:39 AM

Notebooks will not be as good for gaming. The power requirements of high end graphics cards make them unsuitable for laptop use.
If your current mobo supports 800fsb chips, get a P4c 3ghz or 3.2. You will be very happy.
March 7, 2005 7:44:24 AM

PMs are superior to P4s in terms of work per cycle or work per watt.
They are capable of playing the most demanding games at max settings. Right here:

http://www.tomshardware.com/mobile/20050224/index.html

I personally wish PMs are available for desktops as well. I beleive the fastest PM can do more work than my 2.8 Ghz P4c (which is good enough for me)

I'm not a hardware engineer, so please correct me if I am badly mistaken.
Related resources
March 7, 2005 2:29:43 PM

>It seems to be the general opinion that Pentium M
>architecture is superior even to P4 HT

Define "superior". PM is definately superior as a mobile chip, as it has an incredibly much better performance/watt. Its current top binning parts however, aren't quite as fast as P4s or AMD64s. Even overclocked, they are quite good, but not better performers than A64/P4. At least not at their current clockspeeds, if intel can increase them, we'll see.

As to your question; gaming performance is mostly bottlenecked by the videocard, so I wouldn't even consider a laptop there. It will always be more expensive and slower than a high end desktop. I would definately replace that Celeron with something decent, and depending what videocard you have, upgrade that too. It will give you a very much better gaming experience than any laptop can offer for the money.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
March 9, 2005 9:26:20 PM

The difference that a Pentium M has is a shorter pipeline...
for games & the like the Pentium M is clock for clock is the better core but for jobs that use raw clockspeed the P4 will kick its ass

u can get a mobo that takes a Pentium M for a desktop, dunno if the cost is worth it, note a notebook is only now getting the ability to upgrade things like graphics & that costs a lot of cash, get/build a SFF with whatever core u choose is my recommendation...

Trust me I know what I'm doing... ooops, grab the cat...
March 10, 2005 1:37:50 AM

The P-M is rumoured to have a 12-14 stage pipeline - does that sound like a P3 or what, especially as it generates a lowly 22W thermal output? Print an improved P3 chip with the 0.09µm process and I bet you get a P-M. The Prescott on the otherhand has a ridiculous 31 stage pipeline and generates 100W thermal power. There is only one reason the P4-Prescott exists, not because it's better, not because it can compute more and not because it will beat AMD, but because Intel will be able to stick 5GHz on the outside of the PC and dumb Dell customers will think it's great. Since Intel ditched the P3,that has been and continues to be Intel's marketing strategy for the P4. Where they are going with the Dothan, who knows, but as a chip it rocks!

Oh and yes, you can get desktop implementations of the Pentium-M if you want.
March 10, 2005 3:31:27 PM

ridiculous 31 stage pipeline

that the minimun number of pipe the ops will go.Overall pipe use is higher.

i need to change useur name.
March 10, 2005 4:43:03 PM

>Print an improved P3 chip with the 0.09µm process and I bet
>you get a P-M.

That is hardly a secret. Pentium M is indeed based on the old Pentium Pro(/2/3) core.


>There is only one reason the P4-Prescott exists, not because
> it's better, not because it can compute more and not
>because it will beat AMD, but because Intel will be able to
>stick 5GHz on the outside of the PC and dumb Dell customers
>will think it's great.

If they where able to bring out 5 GHz ones without requiring a nuclear power plant, as well as LN cooling, it would be a decent performer. Intel just underestimated the power requirements. Otherwise, there is nothing really wrong with Netburst or having 30+ stages.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
March 10, 2005 6:24:08 PM

Quote:
If they where able to bring out 5 GHz ones without requiring a nuclear power plant, as well as LN cooling, it would be a decent performer. Intel just underestimated the power requirements. Otherwise, there is nothing really wrong with Netburst or having 30+ stages.


Sure, there's something wrong. AMD outperforming Intel would seem to indicate such.

:wink:

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
March 10, 2005 11:10:24 PM

>Sure, there's something wrong. AMD outperforming Intel would
>seem to indicate such.

Not really. If prescott could be scaled to beyond 5 GHz, it would be a more than capable competitor. I think its fair to say its design allows such clock speeds, even on 90nm as indicated by insane LN2 overclocks, but the thermal properties and power supply issues hold it back. Intel seriously underestimated that.

Now, with the revival of the venerable Pentium Pro core (Dothan, Yonah), it will be interesting to see if Intel goes from one extreme to the another again, and wether it will hit a clockscaling/speedpath problem again. Unlike many others, I'm not yet convinced Dothan can do more than 2.4/2.5 GHz on 90nm, which is still quite a way from what K8 will reach (while giving at similar performance/clock).

This will become all the more interestng in a couple of years, with AMD rumoured to have a lower IPC/higher clock design with K10, and IBM now talking about 6 GHz (!) Power6 chips in 2006. Maybe Intel wasn't all that wrong with the netburst philosophy, just too early, like they where with RDRAM, DDR-II, etc. Or maybe intel learned its lesson, where AMD and IBM are simply going to make the same mistake ?

Interesting times ahead :D 

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
March 11, 2005 2:14:33 PM

Quote:
there is nothing really wrong with Netburst or having 30+ stages.

IMHO there is. Intel do it for one reason alone, to claim they have the fastest CPU, and in pure MHz terms they do. But to my mind that is false advertizing and deliberate misleading of the general public.
March 11, 2005 2:25:48 PM

Thats a popular theory, and one I do not agree with. On 130nm, the Pentium 4 was head and shoulders above Pentium 3 (up to 1.4 GHz), or Pentium M (up to 1.7 ? GHz). And I don't think anyone can reasonably expect either architecture to have scaled high enough to seriously threated a P4 3.4 GHz performance wise. Athlon XP on 130nm never came close either.

Of course, intel handily expoited their clockspeeds in their marketing, and one can even believe marketing has driven them to release such high clocked cpu's, but netburst still delivered tangible performance. Until they hit the thermal brick wall that is. Take away the thermal/power issues, and I'd firmly expect Prescott to be todays performance leader as well.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
March 11, 2005 4:29:14 PM

Quote:
There is only one reason the P4-Prescott exists, not because it's better, not because it can compute more and not because it will beat AMD, but because Intel will be able to stick 5GHz on the outside of the PC and dumb Dell customers will think it's great. Since Intel ditched the P3,that has been and continues to be Intel's marketing strategy for the P4.

Right. Did you know that I have an uncle that sounds about that ignorant?

Never mind that: 1) <i>Intel</i> isn't advertising to end users. <i>Dell</i> is. And 2) Intel isn't even using clock speed to identify processors anymore. (But I bet Dell is.)

So your problem should be with <i>Dell</i>, the OEM, who advertises clock speed as the only important factor in the entire PC. It should not be with Intel, the parts manufacturer, who markets <i>much</i> more to OEMs like Dell than they ever do to any end users.

Quote:
Intel do it for one reason alone, to claim they have the fastest CPU, and in pure MHz terms they do. But to my mind that is false advertizing and deliberate misleading of the general public.

You're really a zealot, aren't you? Have you ever heard the phrase: there's more than one way to skin a cat? High clock speed x low IPC = medium clock speed x medium IPC = low clock speed x high IPC. Just because Intel chose to skin the cat in a new way makes it no less effective. (Their lack of using SoI does, but that's another subject.) It has nothing to do with advertising. (Intel barely even advertises to end users.) It has everything to do with trying something new. There's nothing misleading about it.

And as for customers being misled, personally I think that anyone who doesn't research their purchase deserves what they get. I wouldn't buy a house without doing research. I wouldn't buy a car without doing research. Hell, I didn't even buy my last electric shaver without doing research. It's not hard. This is the Age of Information.

(Though personally I think this is more the Age of Broadband now, which is much like the Age of Information except that it garners a much new level of impatience in everything.)

So if Dell convinces the general public to spend money in a stupid way, it's only because the general public allowed themselves to be convinced by Dell's marketing alone. Would you hang on every word of a used car salesman? (Sorry, previously owned...)

<pre>Antec Sonata 2x120mm
P4C 2.6
Asus P4P800Dlx
2x512MB CorsairXMS3200C2
Leadtek A6600GT TDH
RAID1 2xHitachi 60GB
BENQ 16X DVD+/-RW
Altec Lansing 251
NEC FE990 19"CRT</pre><p>
March 11, 2005 4:52:41 PM

Quote:
Did you know that I have an uncle that sounds about that ignorant?

No, I didn't know, congratulations.
March 11, 2005 5:05:41 PM

Quote:
In reply to:
------------------------------------------------------------

Did you know that I have an uncle that sounds about that ignorant?

------------------------------------------------------------

No, I didn't know, congratulations.

I know that his mental prowess comes from long term abuse of alcohol and marijuana. (And goodness only knows what else.) He was even electrocuted once by a live main power line. And he was also in a bad motor cycle accident once at that. In retrospect, it's actually quite amazing that he's as coherent as he is, or for that matter even alive.

So what's your excuse?

<pre>Antec Sonata 2x120mm
P4C 2.6
Asus P4P800Dlx
2x512MB CorsairXMS3200C2
Leadtek A6600GT TDH
RAID1 2xHitachi 60GB
BENQ 16X DVD+/-RW
Altec Lansing 251
NEC FE990 19"CRT</pre><p>
March 13, 2005 4:51:51 AM

That was worth the price of admission
lol

<font color=red>!#&$</font color=red> :eek:  ---<font color=blue><i><b>There's the facts .... the twisted facts ... the distorted facts</font color=blue>,...<font color=red>THEN THERE'S JOURNALISM!</font color=red></i></b>
March 15, 2005 3:20:39 AM

I've seen PM chips being built into desktop sets. I know the PC Club chain offers a system like this, so I'm sure its possible to build a desktop with a PM chip if desired. Although I think it would still seem that the standard desktop solutions are best for desktops.

There are some good gaming laptops but to get a good graphics solutions you will definetly pay. Check out Dell's Inspiron XPS Gen 2. It's just as fast as most top-end desktops, I know it beats my system!! (check my sig for specs).


P4c 3.2Ghz @ 800MHz Northwood / ABIT AI7 / 1GB Corsair XMS-Pro CL2 Pc3200 / 160GB Seagate SATA 7200rpm 8mb cache / BFG-Tech Nvidia GeForce 6800GT 256mb / Antec Sonata case w/Antec TruePower 380W PSU
March 15, 2005 4:07:39 AM

all family here, whew!

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>
March 15, 2005 6:05:25 AM

Well Silver, it is commonly held opinion that scotty was created to get Intel to 5ghz. If we are so ignorant, please enlighten us.
Face it, even if FD SOI does keep scotty from keeping one hand on the throttle, it's still not as good as an A64.
!