Turion or Centrino for the casual gamer - Page 2

Let me add my $.02

There are two MSI 12" notebooks: S260 based on PM and S270 based on Turion MT...

In one of the reviews of S270 it was mentioned that it provides better gaming performance than S260.
On another hand, its battery life seems to be worse.

The reviews can be found by googling. I can post them, if you are interested (provided I don't forget about this thread, hehe).

Yes, I know he's not looking for a dual core processor now, but that doesn't stop him from looking for one later, by the time most programs, especially games, can actually take advantage of dual core. All I'm saying is, by the time these two technologies become popular and everyone uses them, he will need a new laptop, anyway.

Side note to what Ivor said, there is also a bare bone version of the S260 and S270 the MS-1012 and MS-1013.

Also, gaming is too general, it depends on what lines of code are used and/or if its complied via Intel C++ would serve Pentium M(or any other Intel chip) the advantage.

And as for Freak4Dell, As I said its not true, in 2006 ALOT of things will become 64bit. If you look around on the internet, alot of companies are plannign something 64bit releated for 2006.

It's what we call "comparable" in most apps. It falls behind the A64 architecture in a number of applications, although it does lead in a few.

This is what we like to call "Not true." I've seen the Intel compiler bring performance up across the board, I've seen it drop the performance of Intel processors relative to AMD processors, and more. It also didn't make a substantial difference in performance when compared to the Microsoft compiler.

Actually...I was quoting Intel in saying what I did. Intel themselves said in official release that Pentium 4 and Pentium M benifit on Intel C++ compiler due to them checking wich processor your running and tuning Pentium 4 and M to better performance and conserve line code. AMD was complaining about this stating that Intel did ti on purpose, while Intel claims that its there because they wanted jsut to improve their performance sicne they know their own archatecture best.

99% of the benchmarks, the Pentium M out preforms the Turion in 32 bit environments. But, I still say Turion is better.

A 0.5% performance difference does not mark a win, and GamePC does not represent a trusted source. The only substantial advantages that I can remember seeing in one architecture's favour were the results of encoding tests, where the T64 demolished with Pentium M.

I was not talking about GamePC..

I have seen many tests from people who reviewed their turion and their pentium ntoebooks and found pentium superior in 3 fields, tie in 2 and loose in 1.

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2455

Even in AMD's own tests they ahd to give pentium M the win is some fields by 10% or so.

This is nto the only benchmark and there are many others. But as far as benchmarking is concerned, There should definently be more benchmarks.

i bought a laptop a month ago and was set on buying a 64bit chip from AMD

then I did some research and went with the pentium-M

it seems to be a better mobile solution and 64bit apps are still a ways off

64 bit apps are not way off for all of us. I plan on upgrading to xp 64 and running 64 bit mathematica as well as a few other 64 bit applications as soon as I get my new system.

Pentium Ms dont even come close when it comes to alot fo the things I use computers for.

P.S. for a casual gamer the P-M is probably a good bet for now.

SuperPi isn't a goddamned benchmark. It's a joke. Using ten year old code with data sets that fit into the P-M's L2 cache? PCMark showed an overall win for the Pentium M system, but honestly...A virus scanning win? The physics code win surprised me, particularly when you watch it get raped in 3dmark. Web page rendering is amusing, but no one cares, since a Pentium III can visit any site on the web that hasn't been raped by excessive Flash animations, etc. The video compression seems suspicious to me, since I've used an Athlon 64 3200+ (s754) and my Pentium M 1.86 GHz for real-time .wmv capture. The P-M had very noticeable quality losses that improved dramatically when I switched to DV-AVI, which seems to indicate that it certainly wasn't memory or hard drive-bandwidth starved.

As I said I personally favor Turions over the Pentium M.

But as far as there are benchmarks, Pentium M seems to win, I haven't seen a 3rd party benchmark where turion has won.

I myself am hoping for more benhcmarks, I've seen around 10 or so but would like more like his but better more accreditted comparison.

When the laptops are exacly the same build but jsut the chip matters, thats when you can get a good benchmark. Examples would be the:

MSI s260 vs MSI s270
MSI M635(NVDIA GeForce 6600 Go) vs MSI 1032
Compaq Turion vs Compaq Pentium M
Averatec 4100 vs Averatec 4200

These are all good cases to see wich processor really prevails.
Maybe there shall be more benchmarks as more Turions become available.

SuperPI isn't supposed to be a benchmark as much as it is a measure of the mathematical prowess of the processor. Really, it doesn't have any actual bearing on much of anything.

The time where 64-bit processors become a dominant force is not going to be for several years, and saying otherwise is arguing with past technological trends. Considering that Vista--the only Windows operating for several years--is coming in both 32-bit and 64-bit flavors, I'd say that the wiser of us have taken a clue: 32-bit is going nowhere soon. Even in 3-4 years, I'd be surprised if 64-bit processors made up more than 25% of the computer market; people don't run out and buy new computers at the hint of new technology. Just thinking of all the people I know that use computers that are more than three or four years old gives me a pretty clear idea at where we'll be in a few years... so congratulations, you can be one of the select few running a 64-bit processor and operating system.

Anyways, I don't see how you can honestly say that GamePC is not a reliable source, but then turn around and link an amateur review on NBR. Even further, many notebook manufacturers underclock their cards, so you're going to be dealing with a whole variety of factors--even driver versions effect results. In fact, unless you use the desktop motherboards for the mobile chips, you're not going to get similar benchmarks for your parts. As it stands now, the Pentium-M has a clear lead over the Turion in gaming, which is understandable--even desktop PCs featuring the 64-bit processor versus a similarly clocked 32-bit processor have shown equal or lesser performance in games.

The fact is, 64-bit processors are like hybrids. Sure, you'll see one here and there, but they still make up an extremely small percentage of the auto world. And like the Turion (and other 64-bit processors), they'll eventually hit it into the mainstream, but it won't be in the next year or two.

EDIT: Just a word of advice, these "official" benchmarks you're looking for... are you expecting them from the chip makers? Intel and AMD both severely slant their results... its part of the whole "marketing" thing, you know?

Redmumbo, I think you misread...I gave that review for 2 reasons.

1)It had laptops with same architcture

2)It was the quickest benchmark I could find.

As for new technology tredn not picking up, How about HD technology, they stated that by 2007, all will becoem HD, so within 2 years HD changed the whole playing field. Same goes for Plasma and LCDs.

Considering the memory differences (512mb versus 1gb), the differences in integrated graphics, and a variety of other factors, using those laptops to compare the processor performance is very skewed. The fact is, those benchmarks are very inconclusive, especially since the ATI 200 integrated graphics is newer (and apparently more powerful) than the older IGA 900.

Anyways, while all current benchmarks are pointing to a difference, its really not going to kill anybody. Whether you choose the Pentium-M or the Turion, the fact is, you're probably not going to notice a difference unless you look for it! So just go with whatever laptop you like best.

Ahm, there is no way I ever look at official benchmarks....I have yet to see a company post themselves worse than their #1 competitior. I want benchmarks from 3rd parties. And I want them of laptops with dedicated video card and all, everythign is exacly the same on the chips including overlcocking one of them a bit to match the exact like some are 1.86(intel) turion I think is plainly 1.80ghz maybe 1.812 or soemthing. So the only difference would be the actual chip inside. then benchamrk them head to head on an even playing field. Then you can honsotly see the difference.


But ofcourse for most people, Pentium M and Turion make no difference other than turion is more future proof then the pentium M and that pentium M may have a battery life of 10 - 30 min advantage.

Couldnt say it better my self.

also by the time everything goes 64 bit intel would ahve already made the transition.

Laptop<3, you don't get it, the point is that if you buy a laptop now or anywhere in the next few month. Your only 64bit choice is the Turion. And buying a Pentium M would be in a way waist of money cause your own 64 bit Pentium Ms will eclipse them.

What is this, do you not get it? What you get now will not matter. Processors are not the only thing inside a computer. By the time everything is tuned to utilize that 64-bit technology, most of the other components in the system will be outdated. It does not matter what processor you have. Having a 64-bit processor now will not make you any more future proof.