NotebookForums.com › Forums › General Notebook Discussions › Notebook Forums - General › Have you all seen these Turion Benchmarks?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Have you all seen these Turion Benchmarks?

post #1 of 99
4/26/05 at 2:36pm
Thread Starter 
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_cont...urion64&page=1

not to impressive imo
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 99
4/26/05 at 2:52pm
wow
intel chip seems very impressive
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 99
4/26/05 at 2:56pm
Wow.....

This make me feel so much better that I didn't hold out for Turion! LoL!
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lastdon
wow
intel chip seems very impressive
True, until you realize that the highest clocked Turion is actually two speed grades above what was tested, at 2.4GHz, which probably will easily top the PM 2.13.

Even with the lower clock, Turion still holds a substantial lead in scientific apps.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:11pm
But the thing is
if u looko closely even the lowest speed Centrino 1.6 kept up or beat the amd 1.8 turion
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:12pm
so basically even with the Lower clocked Centrino 1.6 it beats the 1.8 Turion pretty impressive on Intels part.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:13pm
Yes, the Turion does hold a straight mathematical calculation advantage over the P-M. But, for most everything else I'm a little disappointed. I suppose if the clock speed of the Turion was increased the edge the P-M has over it would decrease, but they did try overclocking it to 2ghz.

If it is indeed true that Turion notebooks will have about the same battery life as similarly equipped P-M ones then I would highly consider a higher clocked Turion.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:16pm
just dont look at the turion o/C look at the on part compirason of a 1.6ghz Intel and the 1.6ghz turion.. in a suprise the intel takes the lead in some or most of the tests.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:19pm
Yeah, I saw these and felt the same way as smilepak. I had been waiting to see if Turion would paired with high end GPUs, but when I heard that Turion was aimed at mid-range, thin and light notebooks, I knew I could probably live without 64-bit in-order to get a faster GPU (and CPU, it turns out). The P-M is stronger in everything that's important to me: 3D rendering, 2D Content Creation, Video Encoding and Gaming. I think I can live with my old-fashioned 32-bit machine for another year or two, since it's still faster in every way that counts for me. By the time I really need 64-bit, dual-cores and all sorts of new technologies will be available and I can upgrade then...instead of buying a "future-proof" CPU that will be outdated by the time 64-bit is a necessity.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:19pm
it's ok though i'll stick to my desktop for amd and intel for the laptops have the best of both worlds i guesss
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:21pm
I don't think the Turion 64 was ever built to be a 32-bit gaming CPU wich it does handle well! Also I would not make much out of a review made by a computer vendor(!). The Turion 64 is built to be a mobile 64 bit performance chip. Don't see much point in running all these tests in a 32 bit environment for a 64 bit CPU.

The reason to concider a Turion 64 should be that you want to run a 64 bit operating system and be ready for all the performance benefits as they become avilable. Already Cakewalk reported a 40% gain in going to 64 bit and it had nothing to do with increased memory that people seam to think is the only benefit.

If I was looking or waiting for a gaming notebooks I would go witha 64 bit 939 system or a P4-64 bit.

Didn't know anyone was waiting for the Turion 64 to play games in Windows XP 32 bit!
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:29pm
though the Turion was supposed to be built as some thread in here states
as the

Centrino Killer...

i saw no killing whatsoever
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:32pm
so if the turion and amd 64 were built for 64 bit o/s not 32/ then we should not compared them right?
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:36pm
Considering that Turion 1.8GHz consumes 20-25% more power (idle-full) compared to P-M 1.6GHz, I think it's starting to look like a no brainer.

Clearly lower power draw, same performance. Or slightly lower power draw and more performance.

What's the point of Turion now (not in some future 64bit la-la-land)? Price?

I hope it brings P-M prices down more...
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:43pm
These tests look a little suspicious for another reason:

Quote:
Originally Posted by GamePC
Unreal Tournament 2004 is a fast-paced DirectX 8.0 based first person shooter.
The test runs through a series of intensive scenes with twelve AI-controlled bots.
Average FPS scores are taken from the most CPU intensive scenario, Rankin
That is a subjective sampling of which parts of the senerios are being counted as benchmarks. I have see MA64s beating PM 2.13 handily on games such as UT2004 and Farcry. The fact that the 3400+ lags so far behind in the UT benchmark looks a little suspicious to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GamePC
Valve's Half-Life 2 is one of the most popular and system intensive shooters ever.
We test using an in-house recorded fast-paced demo from the “Canals” area.
The test stresses water and smoke shaders along with large outdoor environments.
This test for HL2 seems to avoid what AMD 64 is best at; large number of characters and objects in motion through the physics engiene.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:49pm
lastdon, the new standard of operating systems is 64 bit, Linux 64 bit and Microsoft Windows XP 64 bit (released yesterday). I'm not saying you should not compare, I just don't know how much sense it does if all you care about is 32 bit performance! I didn't care about 16 bit, DOS performance when 32 bit became the norm, I was looking for something that could give me performance and compatibility from now on down the road.

I see nothing wrong with people making their own choices and I hope that everyone get the laptop they fell right with.

I do think the phrase "Centrino Killer" is silly to begin with. But did you think "Centrino Killer" means better 32 bit performance? Let's compare the latest 64 bit games and programs as they become available then, or should we not compared them right?



Ps. Amiga Lives!
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 99
4/26/05 at 3:52pm
The Turion (the ML series, at least) draw more power than 533MHz FSB Dothans and perform similarly or worse than those Dothans? Not very impressive...
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 99
4/26/05 at 4:04pm
HardBall :: though i am an amd fan as well.

I have to admit the truth

the snooree even pointed to articles from these sites

and this just clearly shows that intel chip ahead....................

no matter what,, this site has been referenced many times
and IF the turion was ahead
U guys would be praising it

so i guess props to intel on this part of mobility
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 99
4/26/05 at 4:52pm
I'm prefere AMD over Intel too and I dont see why this would be "tough" if you are an 'AMD fan'?

I'm not trying to convince anyone they should buy an AMD over Intel just because I think it is the best CPU. The best CPU is the one you get with and educated choice dependeing on what is important to you and what you want to be able to do with the computer.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 99
4/26/05 at 4:53pm
why does cpu id show 200 in the HTT?
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 › Have you all seen these Turion Benchmarks?