Originally Posted by ramificatio
This might be off topic but the Turion 64 does not outbench the PM nor the other way around. They are very similar in 32 bit. The GPU is what decides the performance in notebooks. What you should look at is features and usabillity in the whole system. A Pentium-M system lacks a bunch of features! Like 64-bit and SSE3 which obvioulsy will hamper it's usabillity (64-bit) and performance (SSE3 optimization) as time progress. Why would any one want a new system that you could only run old gen. Windows 32 bit and software on? I don't get why people still go with PM. I mean the Ferrari 4000 outbenches any other stock clocked X700 PM notebook and it also uses DDR333MHz at that. 3.5h non gaming use. So why are people still getting the PM? Don't know... I guess some people rather have a fiew more minutes in non gaming use, and sacrfice future usabillity, 64 bit and SSE3
Exactly my point!! I would love to get an AMD chip in a laptop, because in my experience, and I have seen tons of graphs to prove it, AMD architecture just plain and simple games better, even with the same graphics card. Yeah yeah, there is a little difference with mobo chipsets and all that, but the AMD 64 vs the P4 is just no contest with games. If you are running business apps, the P4 wins. So, the PM is a dumbed down P4 basically, thus it should do even worse on games. With me so far? AMD64 = way better than PM (that's the condensed version). Now, read this:
"AMD doesn’t have the resources of Intel, that’s plain and simple. They have done an excellent job with their K8 architecture, but for AMD to devote additional resources to developing another architecture, strictly mobile oriented, it’s just not possible at this time. At the same time, AMD’s Athlon 64 is far more suited for mobile environments than Intel’s Pentium 4 ever was, so the need for a mobile specific architecture isn’t as great for AMD as it was for Intel. So when AMD announced their Turion 64 “Mobile Technology” we had a feeling it would be something very similar to their desktop Athlon 64s, today AMD confirmed that."
Taken from http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=2374
What that tells me is that the Turion is dumbed down LESS than the PM is dumbed down. Which means technically, a system with a Turion should perform better in games than a PM system. So, if the Dell 9300 blows the socks off of the Acer 4005, the only real reason could be that the X700 card sucks, and sucks badly. PLEASE KEEP PERSONAL PREFERENCE OUT OF IT! In my own mind, the previous lot of words made perfect sense, feel free to disagree, but please have some proof. It looks to me like the Ferrari may be a waste of money (it was going to be my next purchase) as the ATI still is eons behind nVidia.