NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Dell Notebook Forums › Dell Notebooks - General › Concerning the Dell Next Gen 2 proc.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Concerning the Dell Next Gen 2 proc.

post #1 of 17
3/13/05 at 9:41pm
Thread Starter 
I saw that alot of people love the new Dell laptop but saw that they have an 'M' processor in it instead of a desktop P4. Is this a performance disadvantage or advantage? I'm not real sure on the M processor but because the new Next Gen has an 'M' processor, should that sway me into getting a diff. laptop?
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 17
3/13/05 at 9:43pm
The Pentium-M has it's advantages and disadvantages over AMD and the P4. But people who concentrate on these negligible differences are just wasting time imo.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 17
3/13/05 at 9:43pm
M is more mobile. The laptop will be smaller, last longer on the battery, and run cooler. A Pentium M / Centrino 2.0GHZ would be about P4 3.5ghz. It's about 150% more.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 17
3/13/05 at 10:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by WorldIRC
M is more mobile. The laptop will be smaller, last longer on the battery, and run cooler. A Pentium M / Centrino 2.0GHZ would be about P4 3.5ghz. It's about 150% more.
I seriously doubt that's the case. Most 2.0 PM perform in the range of an 3.2 P4 w/o HT. One of my housemates has a P4E 3.0 that will outpace the 1.8 PM by a significant margin (when it's not overheating), not just on graphics intensive tasks. In my experience, and according to most of the benchmarks, the PM performs roughly at 1.45-1.55X of its speed compared to the clock of a P4.

2.0 PM certainly does not reach the level of 3.5 GHz P4, that would be a 175% performance of the clock, which is simply not there.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 17
3/13/05 at 10:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HardBall
I seriously doubt that's the case. Most 2.0 PM perform in the range of an 3.2 P4 w/o HT. One of my housemates has a P4E 3.0 that will outpace the 1.8 PM by a significant margin (when it's not overheating), not just on graphics intensive tasks. In my experience, and according to most of the benchmarks, the PM performs roughly at 1.45-1.55X of its speed compared to the clock of a P4.

2.0 PM certainly does not reach the level of 3.5 GHz P4, that would be a 175% performance of the clock, which is simply not there.
A 2.13ghz Pentium-M is supposed to be equivelent to a 3.6ghz P4 with HT.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 17
3/13/05 at 10:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by johare
A 2.13ghz Pentium-M is supposed to be equivelent to a 3.6ghz P4 with HT.
It really depends on what application it it running. For editing or content creation, the P4 will own the PM; and also the A64 to a lesser extent. But PM will perform very well on business applications, and will do pretty well in games head to head with the P4, although falls short of the A64.
http://www.x86-secret.com/articles/c...n/dothan-7.htm

Here are some benches, where the PM overclocked to 2.4 GHz on a desktop chassis ( which does not exist for notebooks ), is pretty comparable to P4EE 3.4 GHz and A64 3400+, with the P4E falling a tad behind. Although the specific performance differences will vary with the type of task. The PM 2.1 will certainly be much slower than the 2.4.

The PM 2.13 will certainly not eclipse the P4E 3.4, except on a few select benches, and even less the 3.6 . The P4EE is still by far the fastest processor among intel consumer chips, and the P4E is no slouch either.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 17
3/13/05 at 10:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HardBall
I seriously doubt that's the case. Most 2.0 PM perform in the range of an 3.2 P4 w/o HT. One of my housemates has a P4E 3.0 that will outpace the 1.8 PM by a significant margin (when it's not overheating), not just on graphics intensive tasks. In my experience, and according to most of the benchmarks, the PM performs roughly at 1.45-1.55X of its speed compared to the clock of a P4.

2.0 PM certainly does not reach the level of 3.5 GHz P4, that would be a 175% performance of the clock, which is simply not there.

Then why does my friends P-M 1.8 GHz lappy beat the crap out of his P4 3.0 GHz? Well not kick the crap, but more like benchmark ahead of it by a very very very small amount (Less than 1%)
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 17
3/13/05 at 10:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelX30
Then why does my friends P-M 1.8 GHz lappy beat the crap out of his P4 3.0 GHz? Well not kick the crap, but more like benchmark ahead of it by a very very very small amount (Less than 1%)
Which benchmarks beat it?
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 17
3/13/05 at 10:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HardBall
It really depends on what application it it running. For editing or content creation, the P4 will own the PM; and also the A64 to a lesser extent. But PM will perform very well on business applications, and will do pretty well in games head to head with the P4, although falls short of the A64.
http://www.x86-secret.com/articles/c...n/dothan-7.htm

Here are some benches, where the PM overclocked to 2.4 GHz on a desktop chassis ( which does not exist for notebooks ), is pretty comparable to P4EE 3.4 GHz and A64 3400+, with the P4E falling a tad behind. Although the specific performance differences will vary with the type of task. The PM 2.1 will certainly be much slower than the 2.4.

The PM 2.13 will certainly not eclipse the P4E 3.4, except on a few select benches, and even less the 3.6 . The P4EE is still by far the fastest processor among intel consumer chips, and the P4E is no slouch either.
I'm just going by what Intel says regarding the new Sonoma based Pentium-M's.

"In the demonstration, the performance of a Sonoma system with a 2.13-GHz Pentium M processor, 1GB of memory, and the Alviso chip set was said to be comparable to that of a desktop system carrying a 3.6-GHz Pentium 4 processor with hyperthreading, 1GB of memory, and the Grantsdale chip set (which also supports PCI Express and DDR2). Intel had previously compared the high end of its notebook technology to the midrange of its desktop technology."
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 17
3/13/05 at 10:53pm
Thread Starter 
Well then whats better for gaming because I'm goin to italy soon and I've been looking for a new desktop but might as well get a desktop replacement now that you can swap the graphics card so it'll never get old.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 17
3/13/05 at 10:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelX30
Then why does my friends P-M 1.8 GHz lappy beat the crap out of his P4 3.0 GHz? Well not kick the crap, but more like benchmark ahead of it by a very very very small amount (Less than 1%)
I agree that those two have quite similar performance values, and will differ depend on the task at hand. I did not say "trounce" or "kick the crap out of" or anything of sort, what I did say is that we saw significant (i.e. visible) difference in AquaMark3, CPUBENCH, ScienceMark2 and the like, mostly with the P4 about 5%-8% faster.

It could have something to do with the robust cooling of the P4 rig that my housemate has. 6 high-speed case fans, and very large air cooled HSF on the CPU (don't remember the model). If a P4E is not properly cooled, any fluctuations into upper ranges of its thermal envelope can depress its score. Which has always been the biggest knock against the P4, not its performance.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 17
3/13/05 at 10:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by johare
I'm just going by what Intel says regarding the new Sonoma based Pentium-M's.

"In the demonstration, the performance of a Sonoma system with a 2.13-GHz Pentium M processor, 1GB of memory, and the Alviso chip set was said to be comparable to that of a desktop system carrying a 3.6-GHz Pentium 4 processor with hyperthreading, 1GB of memory, and the Grantsdale chip set (which also supports PCI Express and DDR2). Intel had previously compared the high end of its notebook technology to the midrange of its desktop technology."
Well, intel has a strategy of pushing the marketing of the sonoma, and the P4 netburst line will end with 2005. So I wouldn't take what they say too seriously, without independent verification. They do so with obvious ulterior motive.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 17
3/14/05 at 1:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chez
Well then whats better for gaming because I'm goin to italy soon and I've been looking for a new desktop but might as well get a desktop replacement now that you can swap the graphics card so it'll never get old.
They are both extremely comparable as far as gaming goes. Watch out for which laptops actually have swappable GPUs, mind you.

Pentium M is far and beyond a superior processor to Pentium 4s, even when taking into consideration content creation, etc. If that is truly what you are concerned about (content creation I mean) get an A64 and reap the additional benefits of less power and heat dissipation.

Keep in mind that soon the Pentium M converter will be available; as in, you will be able to use Pentium Ms in socket LGA775 (P4) motherboards; this will be a very interesting time period, as the Pentium M will be able to take advantage of newer chipsets, as well as what's available for overclocking for them.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 17
3/14/05 at 1:27am
Yes... from what I understand it's impossible to get accurate benchmarks of the Pentium M because it limits the amount of overclocking you can actually do. Personally, I'd just make sure you get something with the new PCI-E cards, since that's going to become the new standard, at least according to nVidia and ATI.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 17
3/14/05 at 1:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSFroggy
Keep in mind that soon the Pentium M converter will be available; as in, you will be able to use Pentium Ms in socket LGA775 (P4) motherboards; this will be a very interesting time period, as the Pentium M will be able to take advantage of newer chipsets, as well as what's available for overclocking for them.
Yes, the next 15 months will be the most interesting period for chips since the inception of the microprocessor. Along with the PM line eventually replacing the Netburst, there are tons of developments.

Initial Turion 64 -- March - April 05
Dual core Egypt, Italy, Denmark (Opteron) -- May-June 05
Dual core Smithfield -- May - June 05
Dual core Toledo A64 -- July - Aug 05
64 bit Celeron -- ?? 05
Dual core Montecito -- Aug - Sept 05
HyperTransport Tech 1.2 / 2800 MHz -- Sept - Oct 05
Socket 939 Sempron 64 -- ?? 05
Dual core Paxville (Xeon) -- ?? 05
Dual core Yonah -- Q1 06
Dual core Taylor (Turion) -- Q1 06
Dual core Windsor/Orlean -- Q1 06 Socket 1207
Intel Memron -- 1H ?? 06
AMD K9 -- 1H ?? 06
Opteron 6xx (quad core??) -- 1H 06
HyperTransport 2.0 / 25.6 GHz -- 1H ?? 06
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 17
3/14/05 at 1:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelX30
The Pentium-M has it's advantages and disadvantages over AMD and the P4. But people who concentrate on these negligible differences are just wasting time imo.
completely agree, especially for gaming.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 17
3/14/05 at 2:33am
A 2.0GHz P-M can do float point operations as quickly as a 3.2GHz+ P4

However, it's reglular arithmetic operating power do not even come close to that of the P4.

So in games, the two should be fairly matched.

But in spreadsheets/database management, the P4 will outperform the P-M
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dell Notebooks - General
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Dell Notebook Forums › Dell Notebooks - General › Concerning the Dell Next Gen 2 proc.