NotebookForums.com › Forums › General Notebook Discussions › Notebook Forums - General › Intel Centrino Mobile Technology Processor
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Intel Centrino Mobile Technology Processor

post #1 of 9
9/13/04 at 8:27pm
Thread Starter 
Intel Centrino Mobile Technology 75 Processor is any good? better then AMD 64 3200?
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 9
9/13/04 at 8:34pm
If you mean the Pentium M 755, it has both lower power requirements and lower performance on average compared to the (Mobile) Athlon 64 3200+. Prices and features are not comparable though
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 9
9/13/04 at 11:08pm
well, 775 would kill the amd 64 3200+, if it existed, that is
As for the 755 (2.0 Dothan), chances are it is AT LEAST equal to the 3200. If you want to look for a faster amd 64 you'd better compare the 755 with the amd 64 3400+. However, the price of the 755 is still a bit too high for most people's liking.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 9
9/14/04 at 6:05am
Thats true...

Athlon 64-M WHERE R U?
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 9
9/14/04 at 1:18pm
take a look at this review and decide, the 755 is faster in almost all the benchmarks:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2129&p=7
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 9
9/14/04 at 1:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by nark
take a look at this review and decide, the 755 is faster in almost all the benchmarks:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2129&p=7
Huh? Of the 15 tests, the Athlon 64 3000+ performs better than the Pentium M 755 in 10 of those tests. In games the Athlon 64 3000+ performs better in 4 out of 5 tests. With the Athlon 64 3200+ it would be even more clear what type of CPU is faster
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 9
9/14/04 at 1:40pm
Actually, Snorre, by my count, it is split rather evenly between the P-M 755 and the AMD 3000+. In the cases where the AMD was on top it was by a practically statistically insignificant amount - at the expense of considerable battery life.

It really boils down to the preference and needs of the individual user. If they are looking for better battery life and surprisingly good performance given the low power consumption, the P-M would be the way to go. If you want a slight edge in performance and are less concerned with battery life then you might want to take a closer look at the AMD 3000+/3200+
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 9
9/14/04 at 2:40pm
with such different applications, the dothan 2.0 is definitely a contender with the A64 line.

obviously, the actual laptop user that cares about battery life and lightweight package will go pentium M and the user that doesn't really care about weight and just wants a somewhat-portable solution will go A64.

When amd has their lightweight low-power 64-bit solution, then the tests will be more relevant. As for games, I'm not sure a difference of <2 frames per second is much of an advantage. And the tests, which used a dothan laptop vs an amd64 desktop "configured like a laptop" aren't so scientific. Clocking down a desktop radeon 9600 against a similarly clocked laptop 9600?
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 9
9/14/04 at 3:23pm
I was under the impression that the AMD64 2800+ is roughly comparable to a 1.7-1.8 Dothan and that the 2.0 should be roughtly comparable to P4 3.2GHz and AMD64 3000+ or even 3200+. Was I far off?

The thing is, they all have their stengths, so it's more about doing a lot of tests and finding some sort of an average performance rating. Then you pick the one that performs the best in what *you're* gonna do. AMD for gaming I would say Pretty much the same as on desktops.
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 › Intel Centrino Mobile Technology Processor