NotebookForums.com › Forums › General Notebook Discussions › Notebook Forums - General › Turion review.. at tomshardware..
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Turion review.. at tomshardware..

post #1 of 15
9/11/05 at 12:52pm
Thread Starter 
http://www.tomshardware.com/mobile/2...s_and_settings

here is a review with the turion and it even compares it to the Intel chip

I don't see how the turion in the other thread was so much ahead of the intel chip... here it seem intel is ahead but that might be cause of the 1.86ghz compared to the 1.80ghz from amd..?
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 15
9/11/05 at 1:12pm
Hmmm. Where was the other review? I know there are two series of Turino chips (ML, and MT). MT is the "latest" chip, and all I know is the MT series chips are supposed to be better for battery life.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 15
9/11/05 at 2:25pm
This is already covered in depth in a previous thread:

NBF thread of Turion / P-M technical comparison at Toms Hardware
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 15
9/11/05 at 7:02pm
This is Tomshardware. He is a Intel fan boy and will alway show Intel winning test. His office is in a Intel building that he rents from Intel in germany. He was caught many time using over clocked intel CPU and stating it was stock speed in the past and I don't trust them at all. Only noobs link to tomshardware.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 15
9/12/05 at 2:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by {Sniping}Waste
This is Tomshardware. He is a Intel fan boy and will alway show Intel winning test. His office is in a Intel building that he rents from Intel in germany. He was caught many time using over clocked intel CPU and stating it was stock speed in the past and I don't trust them at all. Only noobs link to tomshardware.
Hey Snipe, How you doing? Long time no see. Sooo, you have a bad day or what? You're smarter than that. You should read the article before making any comments, especially considering Harald Thons & Bert Töpelts final conclusion:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toms Hardware
As our comprehensive tests have shown, a notebook like the Megabook 635 is both stable and works well, even though it's built around mobile CPUs such as the Turion 64 or the Mobile Sempron from AMD, in tandem with a chipset from a third-party vendor like ATI. From a look and feel perspective, in fact, the behavior this system is hard to differentiate form one equipped instead with a Pentium M and Intel's 915PM chipset.

All claims to the contrary notwithstanding, for an AMD notebook based on the Turion 64 Mobile Technology, wireless networking is just as simple and worry-free as it is on a Centrino device.

.......if the CPU and graphics components are purposely maxed out, as when gaming, the tables turn completely as our results showed, and the Intel system falls behind. In this last usage scenario the lion's share of power consumption in a notebook goes to the PCIe-attached 3D graphics chip and video RAM, and not to the CPU.
If this is the conclusion from Intel fanboys, then the Turion really is an amazing chip, right?
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 15
9/12/05 at 2:39am
Thread Starter 
wow , i ain't a fan boy of neither,
but u can't be biased all the time towards tomshardware.

if the amd came out on top , all you amd fans would be saying OH yeh amd rules rocks etc.

pahlease.

i got both, so i enjoy both worlds!
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 15
9/12/05 at 2:42am
Thread Starter 
u guys see that review at logic whatever it was, and the amd was ahead in a lot

but wasn't that review flawed? OH no it was perfect because the amd was ahead. but

IF the intel was ahead in there review you guys would say it was flawed.

b.s
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 15
9/12/05 at 11:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by lastdon
u guys see that review at logic whatever it was, and the amd was ahead in a lot

but wasn't that review flawed? OH no it was perfect because the amd was ahead. but

IF the intel was ahead in there review you guys would say it was flawed.

b.s
The whole point is its a AMD VS Intel review from Tomshardware and that will always be a bad review. I look at them this way. Fool me once shame on them, fool me twice shame on me.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 15
9/12/05 at 11:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karma
Hey Snipe, How you doing? Long time no see. Sooo, you have a bad day or what? You're smarter than that. You should read the article before making any comments, especially considering Harald Thons & Bert Töpelts final conclusion:



If this is the conclusion from Intel fanboys, then the Turion really is an amazing chip, right?
I did and he will say many things to CYA at the end but still the data will be not right.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 15
9/12/05 at 2:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by {Sniping}Waste
I did and he will say many things to CYA at the end but still the data will be not right.
After pouring through those 25+ pages I can't find any way that they could have fudged those numbers, unless they just faked everything. At that point, it just becomes a philosophical belief of what you think is real or not real.

I remember the incident you're referring to, a few years ago. I actually stopped reading their stuff for awhile, then approached what they wrote with a critical view (still do). If you can point out what methods they used that are suspicious, I'd like to hear it.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 15
9/12/05 at 3:04pm
I would like to know what settings are used in the battery test like screen britness, is wifi on or off, if bluetooth is on or off, the voltage of the memory used to start with. The Doom 3 test are messed up like how is the turion with DDR 266 is beating the same turion with DDR 333 and DDR400. The FPS numbers don't look right in the Doom 3 test with the PM with dubble the FPS then the Turion. Test with P4 with 2 meg L2 dont show the big speed boost over A64s in doom 3 and he states that is because the PM has 2 meg L2 over the Turions 1 meg L2 that the PM has doubble the FPS.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 15
9/12/05 at 3:37pm
All I care is, in conclusion, AMD has developed a viable alternative to the Intel Centrino chipset (specifically the Pentium M processor). This makes me happy.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 15
9/12/05 at 3:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by {Sniping}Waste
I would like to know what settings are used in the battery test like screen britness, is wifi on or off, if bluetooth is on or off, the voltage of the memory used to start with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toms
In contrast to DDR2 memory (which requires 1.8V) DDR requires higher input voltage (2.5V). And higher input voltages mean more power consumption, which shortens battery life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toms
To make the results from the notebooks as comparable to each other as possible, we set the brightness of all displays to a fixed value of about 100cd/m2 prior to starting our tests.
They don't mention Bluetooth settings or WiFi, although I can't see them making or breaking the good conclusion Toms gave the Turion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by {Sniping}Waste
The Doom 3 test are messed up like how is the turion with DDR 266 is beating the same turion with DDR 333 and DDR400. The FPS numbers don't look right in the Doom 3 test with the PM with dubble the FPS then the Turion. Test with P4 with 2 meg L2 dont show the big speed boost over A64s in doom 3 and he states that is because the PM has 2 meg L2 over the Turions 1 meg L2 that the PM has doubble the FPS.
This I disregarded. I can't see how the P-M could have done so well either. Doom3 is a terrible benchmark though. It gives you fps that are not actually displayed while in gameplay, so I skip Doom3 anyway.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 15
9/14/05 at 11:51pm
It's almost like he forgot to run the benchmark x2 for the texture loading thing for the turion processors. Is that problem in doom 3? Or am I thinking of another game? I think it was Doom 3 where you had to run the benchmark x2 because the first time the textures have to be loaded into memory... not sure though.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 15
9/15/05 at 4:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooga
It's almost like he forgot to run the benchmark x2 for the texture loading thing for the turion processors. Is that problem in doom 3? Or am I thinking of another game? I think it was Doom 3 where you had to run the benchmark x2 because the first time the textures have to be loaded into memory... not sure though.
I forgot, but you are right. It's better to benchmark two times so that the data can be efficiently cached.

Quote:
Prealoading the Demo
By default the game has the option to preload the demos turned on com_preloadDemos 1, but when you run the demo it is not being preloaded and there is still access to the hard drive while the demo runs, and so you get slower framerate. Thats why most of the people are running the demo twice and give the second higher score as the final result (2 frames difference in our test between the first and the second run). Actually by doing this you don't give benchmark of the game itself, but mostly of the videocard, because there are no other delays by the system when all the files are preloaded. If you've noticed in the real gameplay not everything is being preloaded and there is often access to the HDD. This means that you want to give more accurate benchmark results you should use the first result which is giving more accurate results of the whole system being stressed and not only the video. Even if you turn of the preload by executing com_preloadDemos 0 in the console the second time you run the demo, it is being preloaded and runs faster. So if you are planing on doing benchmarks that are as close as posible to the real gameplay you shoudn't be running the same demo twice without reloading the game.
Doom 3 benchmarking
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Notebook Forums - General
NotebookForums.com › Forums › General Notebook Discussions › Notebook Forums - General › Turion review.. at tomshardware..