amd turion 64 vs intel centrino core duo

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by synthetic, Jun 12, 2006.

  1. synthetic

    synthetic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    ok im buying a new laptop, ( currently have the amd 64 turion , which is my sisters ) , but i sicne then the intel duo has come out and i see they cost more then the amds...... so can someone tell me what the rage is?
     
  2. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    well, first of all, your basic Pentium M setup is WAAAY better than the Turion64. And let's add the fact that Core Duo > Pentium M.

    Now for a better breakdown.

    Performance:
    • Core Duo has two cores. This allows Core Duo to handle TWO processes simultaneously. This is a huge advantage. Turion64 has no option for this. Core Duo is the FIRST and currently is the ONLY mobile processor to have more than one core.
    • Core Duo has creamed Pentium M and Turion64 in benchmarks. Faster by a LOT, not just a little.

    Battery Life:
    • Core Duo gets better battery life than Turion64
    Thermal Load:
    • Core Duo generates less heat than Turion64
    • Less power is wasted doing the same amount of work
    Reliability:
    • Core Duo notebooks emply Intel chipsets. They are renouned for their outstanding reliability

    Basically I would NEVER buy a Turion64 notebook. And that was back when Pentium M was Intel's best. Now that the Core Duo is out, Intel has once-again proven that they are the *only* reasonable choice in the mobile market.
     
  3. synthetic

    synthetic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    very biased, lol.....

    here is the failure of the core duo.... no 64bit processing.
     
  4. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    Have you read reviews of AMD 64-bit technology and its practical use today? It is a good idea, and in the future will be the way we go. However, current implementations prove no performance increase. Little/no software takes advantage of 64-bit. And even software that is written for 64-bit has little/no performance gains.

    And when there are small performance benefits to 64-bit, the Core Duo *still* kills it in speed.





    You say it's biased, but even AMD sack-riders freaking LOVE the Intel mobile chips.
     
  5. synthetic

    synthetic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    i would like to install suse / fc x64

    do you have the bench mark #s? How many ghz faster is it comapred toa 2.0 amd 64 turion.
     
  6. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    search google.

    Everyone is agreeing that Intel is the way to go for a notebook.

    I say one review that put the Core Duo (laptop) up against an AMD Athlon 64 X2 DESKTOP and they were neck-and-neck. Remeber the Core Duo is in a laptop and the Turion64 is a SINGLE core chip that is toned-down (not as good) from the Athlon64.
     
  7. synthetic

    synthetic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    the core duo system bus is nearly 1/3 the speed of the amd. 667mhz vs 1600mhz
     
  8. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    and you have obviously never used one. Core Duo is mucho faster when compared to Turion64.

    This is funny because you're quoting MHz as if that means a damn thing. AMD for years has tried to get people to believe it doesn't and now the AMD sackriders (you, in this case) are trying to make their arugment based solely on MHz :mamoru:

    Oh the ironing :mamoru:
     
  9. synthetic

    synthetic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    im just looking for facts, i want to hear something unbiased. Do you have stock in intel or something? I mean i see no point in sac riding unless you have stock.

    SO far i have gathered:

    AMD 64
    + 3x faster bus
    + 64bit capability
    + Cheaper

    Intel
    + Runs cooler and prolongs battery life


    Whats the point of two cores if it slows down the system bus so drastically
     
  10. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    i have no stock in intel.

    You are really just ignorant, it would seem. And for every time you call me an intel sackrider, you should step back and look at yourself. You sackride a product that most other people say is inferior to the Core Duo.

    GO LOOK AT BENCHMARKS

    Bus speed is not all-incumbent. AMD has a faster bus, yet uses slower memory. In the real-world, the Core Duo out-performs the Turion64

    64-bit provides no performance benefit, and has been demonstrated to provide a DECREASE in reliability.

    About the ONLY thing going for AMD is that it's a few bucks cheaper. But that isn't even a fair statement because the added cost for Intel provides increased performance AND reliability...
     
  11. synthetic

    synthetic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    reliable on what terms.??

    AMD 64
    + 3x faster bus
    + 64bit capability
    + Cheaper

    Intel
    + Runs cooler and prolongs battery life
    + Bigger cache
    + faster memory
     
  12. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    Two reasons:
    • Intel chipset > * (this has nothing to do with CPU. chipset is collection of Northbridge and Southbridge)
    • 32-bit x86 CPUs will be the baseline for this comparison. 64-bit x86 code has many reliability issues not found in the much more mature 32-bit sources. This results in a net-gain in relative stability for the 32-bit platform. Most people with AMD64 CPUs still run 32-bit Operating Systems because of this
     
  13. synthetic

    synthetic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Intel chipset > * (this has nothing to do with CPU. chipset is collection of Northbridge and Southbridge) ...argh why give stupid reason like this... i need to know why.... amd uses intels chipset anyways.

    the second reason is well explained
     
  14. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    AMD hasn't used Intel chipsets for at least 6 years. Please cite a recent AMD system using an Intel chipset.
     
  15. synthetic

    synthetic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    they use the x86 architecture... anyways, the msot seamlessly smooth system in terms of speed would have the fast cycle over all, between bus, cpu and memory, looks like the bottle neck of the amd64 is the memory atm.
     
  16. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    x86 architecture has NOTHING to do with what chipset it has :rolleyes:

    Your brochure-surfing means of systems comparison is quite scary. Have fun with that...
     
  17. synthetic

    synthetic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    your replies are no better than marketing brochure, did you memorize them.. lol
     
  18. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    it's obvious you have never looked at a benchmark.
     
  19. Doc Brown

    Doc Brown Don't make me make you my hobby

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    16,404
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio
    Wow, somebody was feeling patient this morning.

    [​IMG]
     
  20. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    As much as I dislike Jolly's persistent assheadedness, I have to side with him on this one. Intel, AMD, Transmeta, VIA, IBM, and (I think) Sun Microsystems ALL produce CPUs with the x86 instruction set. In fact, if they didn't, people wouldn't be able to run the same operating systems on all the different CPUs out there. Windows, the new OSX, and *nix all are designed to use x86 instructions. The guy who thought this was a distinct feature of Intel CPUs really does need to do his homework.
     
  21. synthetic

    synthetic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    sun is not x86 lol
     
  22. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    So many people here lack basic reading-comprehension skills, it's sad. :wtc:
     
  23. Doc Brown

    Doc Brown Don't make me make you my hobby

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    16,404
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio
    After I posted, I realized that I would probably come off as being sarcastic
    because of the post of his that I responded to.
    But I was serious. He made 9 seperate posts to somebody that
    came across as an annoying newb.
     
  24. synthetic

    synthetic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    well if you have to make stupid assumptions like that you shouldnt say nothing at all.
     
  25. Doc Brown

    Doc Brown Don't make me make you my hobby

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    16,404
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio
    See, that's my point though. The guy told you exactly what you needed
    to know.
    They are faster.
    Cooler.
    Use less power.

    But you chose to ignore the faster part in every one of your posts.

    It seems to me that you were making a stupid assumption that
    there is something else about the AMD that makes it better.

    And if that's the case, then why bother to ask in the first place?
     

Share This Page