Processor Comparisons in terms of encoding/multitasking?

[Horseflyofdoom]

i know that a pentium m * 1.6-1.7 is roughly equal to a pentium 4 but the pentium 4 will still beat it in multitasking and encoding. My question is what pentium m processor would it take to perform roughly equal to a pentium 4 in multitasking/encoding? Like what pentium m processor would it take to be equal to a 3-3.2 ghz pentium 4 in terms of multitasking and encoding, the things that the pentium 4 excel at?

[nark]

Originally Posted by Horseflyofdoom

i know that a pentium m * 1.6-1.7 is roughly equal to a pentium 4 but the pentium 4 will still beat it in multitasking and encoding. My question is what pentium m processor would it take to perform roughly equal to a pentium 4 in multitasking/encoding? Like what pentium m processor would it take to be equal to a 3-3.2 ghz pentium 4 in terms of multitasking and encoding, the things that the pentium 4 excel at?

none, with hyperthreading, the p-m will be left in the dust when it comes to multithreading. But this is of course for very heavy multitasking, not for light things. Take a look at a couple of dual core articles....especially the anandtech one. Just so u know, the amd 64 has a big advantage in multitasking becuase of the integrated memory controller. For encoding, i would say roughly a 2.5 ghz p-m.

[Horseflyofdoom]

thanks, what exactly would be considered light/heavy multitasking?

[Entropius]

I find that with my Athlon 64 3400+ notebook, the bottleneck to multitasking is rarely the processor. It's extremely rare for a program to have to sit and wait for the processor to finish; more often it's the hard disk.