Benchmarks & Summary
As this article documents our latest update of our Mobile Processor Charts, you will find all benchmark results on the Mobile CPU Charts page. You will find all Turion 64 X2 mobile processors and the majority of Intel’s Core 2 Duo E7000 lineup. Remember that the results can directly be compared to our Desktop CPU Charts as well.
Summary
Although AMD’s Turion 64 X2 performance cannot match the performance level of the current 45-nm Core 2 Duo T8000 family, the AMD mobile processors’ performance is more than sufficient for business or multimedia notebooks. Both AMD and Intel are about to launch their next-generation platforms – Puma on the AMD side and Montevina for Intel. Although Puma most likely will not be able to play in the performance champion’s league, it will be the first mobile chipset to support hybrid graphics. This means that Puma platforms will be able to run on integrated graphics for maximum power saving when you are one the road, and on a discrete graphics processor once you plug the notebook into a power port. If AMD were to add support for external PCI Express graphics (see external cabling specification) it would be possible to purchase a high-end graphics box that you could use either on a desktop PC or a notebook.
Intel will once again offer the most advanced mobile platforms from a feature standpoint. Montevina will increase processor and Front Side Bus clock speeds while maintaining or slightly reducing power consumption. It will introduce the first mobile quad-core processor while increasing processing performance across the entire portfolio, and offer the first combined WLAN/WiMAX networking solution for the mainstream market And Intel will also take DDR3 memory into the mobile space.
It will be interesting to see how well AMD can position its Puma platform against the Centrino 2 offering from Intel. A lot will depend on Intel’s pricing policy, which might or might not allow AMD to conquer a good part of the mainstream. The high end clearly is reserved for Intel while we see AMD dominating the $500-$750 notebook sector. Eventually, you might also get excellent deals on the current generation of AMD hardware, which will soon be considered outdated, though not obsolete.
Latest CPU News
- 05/24 – Nvidia to Push Tablet Prices to $199 With Kai Platform
- 05/23 – AMD Backing Out of CPU Speed Wars Against Intel
- 05/22 – AMD Hitting The Casino Floor With Embedded R-Series
- 05/22 – Does Your AMD FX Platform BSOD with Steam? Read This.
- 05/20 – Intel To Support Cheap Ultrabooks With Low-Cost Celerons
Latest CPU reviews
- 05/24 – Overclocking Core i7-3770K: Learning To Live With Compromise
- 05/22 – Core i5-3570K, -3550, -3550S, And -3570T: Ivy Bridge Efficiency
- 05/18 – Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: May 2012
- 05/15 – AMD A10-4600M Review: Mobile Trinity Gets Tested
- 05/14 – Core i7-3720QM: Ivy Bridge Makes Its Mark On Mobility
So if this is an updated mobile cpu chart, where are the T8100's T9300's?
45nm is the way to go on laptops
I also miss some processor in the T5000 series, because they are very common in low-end laptops. Good work anyway!
I too am very dissapointed that your mobile CPU chart doesn't inlcude the T5000 series of processors from Intel. I realize that everyone wants to see the "high end", but some of want to compare it to the low end as well.
I just purchased an HP 17" laptop and was trying to find some data on the T5000 processors because that is what comes stock on the model I purchased. I wanted to see if it was really worth it to spend the extra ~$200 to upgrade to the T9000 processors. I had to look elsewhere to get that kind of comparrison.
To bad for Toms' sites, I found another reputable site that I will now use as a reference tool. Shame on Tom's for not covering the mid and low range products.
65nm Turion X2's support DDR2-800. Why wasn't this speed used instead of DDR2-667?
toms you are no1 but you need more laptop cpu and gpu charting.
Wow, I knew my TL-60 was pathetic but I never realized just how much
I like the charts, I like the interactivity and I love that we can compare mobile and desktop CPUs. I just wish mine didn't rank so low.
Copying an earlier comment, these charts need many more chips on them. I just bought an otherwise screaming laptop with an 8800M GTS GPU but only T5550 CPU, and want to know how much improvement I'd get moving up to a T8xxx or T9xxx.
Plus in general I miss how the charts used to allow highlighting of specific processors for easier comparison.
Tom's used to be number 1. They are jut OK now. If you don't know more than the authors and are not able to independently screen the information you can't trust the data or conclusions at Tom's anymore
Copying an earlier comment, these charts need many more chips on them. I just bought an otherwise screaming laptop with an 8800M GTS GPU but only T5550 CPU, and want to know how much improvement I'd get moving up to a T8xxx or T9xxx.Plus in general I miss how the charts used to allow highlighting of specific processors for easier comparison.
That's a bit pointless why review lots when the few they have are done poorly anyway.
Whats the point of adding these benchmarks without demonstrating that your Notebook battery will last - less, more or the same between models/price/performance.
Tom's grab a load meter and find the DC power load of each of these processors on your Solar Power equipment (direct DC input not AC PSU, to emulated a Notebook Battery).
1. record peak and typical power in "each & every" application/benchmark
2. record power consumption at system IDLE