Perhaps I was defensive. It is often the only way to carry a point across - not so in this circumstance. I apologize.
Here let's try to follow this logically: 2 systems exactly the same configuration - Precisely the same configuration. We put one in a big tower chassis, and we put the other in a smaller notebook chassis - to fit it all in, we change the shape of components, make them smaller but less easy to assemble; We put this system together like a jigsaw puzzle and it ends up being much smaller than the other. Now why on earth would the smaller system suddenly start performing badly?! [Hear me out]
It is comparable to Shuttle PCs - It uses the same chipset as a "normal" tower system, but the motherboard is shrunk and is less expandable etc. It doesn't perform any worse because it is small. It's not possible.
The same applies to notebooks. Of course you get your low power notebooks with slower graphics, and slower CPU and a 'Power Saving' Chipset, but those aren't designed to compete with similarly spec'd desktops.
But other notebooks such as the Hypersonic Sonic Aviator which uses standard PC components that are simply redesigned on the PCB to fit into a notebook perform basically the same as a desktop PC. The only problem with that notebook is the Mobility Radeon 9000 which doesn't quite perform as well as a standard Radeon 9000 as it is not clocked the same. If it was, well the answer is obvious. But then on the other hand, you have the GeForce 4 Go 4200 - on my D800 it scores 11000 3DMarks at Default. Most desktops with GeForce 4 Ti 4200s don't even break the 10000 mark, and if they do it is not by much unless it is coupled to a very fast board and CPU and/or if it is overclocked.
Take a look at Anand's comparison between a Pentium 4 2.4GHz notebook, and a 2.4GHz Pentium 4 Desktop system. Look the notebook performs slightly slower than the desktop - but not by "30 - 50%", no in fact in most of the tests it scored within 5% of the desktop system which can easily be accounted for: THG in its motherboard tests often finds that identical systems on different motherboards can have up to a 10% performance difference. This is usually accounted for by the Motherboard manufacturer overclocking the motherboards FSB by 1 or 2MHz, but those slight increases can make significant performance differences. Of course in reality, it is highly unlikely that you would ever notice the difference between two computers, one with a 5% performance deficit.
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1674&p=7
In this review by Anandtech, the GeForce 4 Go 4200 is compared to the GeForce 4 Ti 4200. The GeForce 4 Go looses out here, but this is explained by the fact that it is set to run at a maximum of 200MHz Core and 400MHz Memory, compared to the desktop's 250MHz, 500MHz. Then of course you can just overclock the GF4Go to those speeds with no problems and voila! Identical performance, thus proving once more that identical components equals identical performance.
http://www.anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.html?i=1745&p=5
I mean think about it?! How can it NOT be the same???
Allow me to continue:
Anand went on to put a 2.8GHz Pentium 4 notebook against a 3.06GHz Desktop. The scores were within 10% of the desktops, just as a desktop 2.8Ghz Pentium 4 would be.
At this point, it should be noted that THG hardly ever does desktop-notebook comparisons, and as good as THG is, nothing beats experience - and in this issue, Anandtech has the greater.
So as you can see I haven't been "shooting my mouth off", and you are quite blatantly wrong. "Everyone else" is not wrong, I know that Grassapa agrees with me to a certain extent - in fact most people who think logically even in a remote way would. So here it is:
A notebook with identical specifications to a desktop system, will perform precisely the same within a reasonable margin of error.
There you have it. I hope you've learned something.
RaPTuRe
Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram