NotebookForums.com › Forums › General Notebook Discussions › Notebook Forums - General › Turion MT-37 - 2 questions..
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Turion MT-37 - 2 questions.. - Page 2

post #21 of 42
7/11/05 at 12:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck232
Wow, this could be lots of fun. I haven't run into a hardcore AMD fanboy in a long time. Here's another to back myself up. Come on bud, let's show some stuff here...

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/2005...ntium4-10.html

Still showing P-M stronger in games clock for clock.
Well, I'm no AMD fanboy, my friend; you can search through my post. And I'm typing on my Pentium Sony right now; and I have owned more intel machines in my life than AMD's; and I got another Sony with P4 1.7 desktop back home.

Tomshardware, another typical case of a review site in intel's backpocket, and also discussed to death, I really hate to quote myself , but you can see this thread:
http://www.notebookforums.com/showth...432#post923432
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 42
7/11/05 at 1:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by HardBall
Well, I'm no AMD fanboy, my friend; you can search through my post. And I'm typing on my Pentium Sony right now; and I have owned more intel machines in my life than AMD's; and I got another Sony with P4 1.7 desktop back home.

Tomshardware, another typical case of a review site in intel's backpocket, and also discussed to death, I really hate to quote myself , but you can see this thread:
http://www.notebookforums.com/showth...432#post923432
So I guess this review is also garbage? He is a firm supporter of AMD.
It shows your 3000+ running around 80% of the pm 2.0 with similar hardware.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2382&p=7

I would really like to know the specs of the 2 machines you benchmarked.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 42
7/11/05 at 1:16am
Ok HardBall, tell me if you're dissing all these PROFESSIONAL REVIEWS, what is to be trusted? I mean show me something I haven't seen that proves otherwise and maybe I'd be more inclined to agree but all you've done so far is disregard both reviews I've shown without providing any evidence otherwise. Please be as kind to show us your enlighted views.

BTW, here's another. I'll assume since it also shows that the P-M is superior in gaming that it would mean it's been bought off by Intel...

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...mm-780_15.html
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 42
7/11/05 at 1:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RamIt
So I guess this review is also garbage? He is a firm supporter of AMD.
It shows your 3000+ running around 80% of the pm 2.0 with similar hardware.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2382&p=7

I would really like to know the specs of the 2 machines you benchmarked.
That is a right legit review, and the results show that the 3000+ and the PM 2.0 neck to neck; on Doom III, the 3000+ is slightly faster:

PM 2.0 = 85.0
A64 3000+ = 85.3

and on Wolfstein, the PM is a hair faster, both well within 1% margin:

PM 2.0 = 85.5
A64 3000+ = 85.4

Which bench are you reading?


The systems I tested is are both my housemates machines, one is a CL56 based machine, with MR9700. While the other is an Arima A64 based machine, with an overclocked MR9600 (to 9700 speeds).
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 42
7/11/05 at 1:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck232
Ok HardBall, tell me if you're dissing all these PROFESSIONAL REVIEWS, what is to be trusted? I mean show me something I haven't seen that proves otherwise and maybe I'd be more inclined to agree but all you've done so far is disregard both reviews I've shown without providing any evidence otherwise. Please be as kind to show us your enlighted views.

BTW, here's another. I'll assume since it also shows that the P-M is superior in gaming that it would mean it's been bought off by Intel...

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...mm-780_15.html
This is a perfectly legitimate review, as we know xbitlabs reputation. It had one PM that was not yet available at the time of the review (and one I still haven't seen any quantity in store today), beating the AMD CPUs on one of the benchmarks.

That aside, it shows nothing between the comparison between PM 755 and A64 3000+, which is what we are discussing here.

But if xbitlabs, anandtech shows PM beating an A64, I will fully accept the results as legitimate. Or if others such as an article from theRegister reporting the comparison between the two, it would definitely be taken into account. However, I don't take results from biased crack sites such as gamepc or tomshardware seriously, just as I don't take things from AMDZone at their face value.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 42
7/11/05 at 1:58am
The whole point I was trying to prove here is that the Turion is not faster clock for clock than the P-M in gaming. The Xbitlabs benchmarks especially show that the P-M is indeed faster. Unreleased yes, but clock for clock it will be faster and same goes for the lower clocked ones (at least the 533MHz FSB ones for sure. With the 400MHz Dothans, the comparison is much closer).

I'm glad you'll accept these benches with open eyes though. Guess you're not such a hardcore AMD guy. Many would turn a blind eye.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 42
7/11/05 at 2:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by HardBall
That is a right legit review, and the results show that the 3000+ and the PM 2.0 neck to neck; on Doom III, the 3000+ is slightly faster:

PM 2.0 = 85.0
A64 3000+ = 85.3

and on Wolfstein, the PM is a hair faster, both well within 1% margin:

PM 2.0 = 85.5
A64 3000+ = 85.4

Which bench are you reading?


The systems I tested is are both my housemates machines, one is a CL56 based machine, with MR9700. While the other is an Arima A64 based machine, with an overclocked MR9600 (to 9700 speeds).

The purpose of this article was an update to compare systems on a similar platform. The benchmarks for the 2.0 and under were from a previous article on a system that was slightly crippled.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2342&p=1

The updated article with the 2.13 has a regular desktop motherboard with an adaptor and without the crippled 855gme chipset.

EDIT:Sorry I was looking at the 2.13
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 42
7/11/05 at 2:22am
Chuck, and RamIt

I'm glad that we are all reasonable people, and have reached an understanding.

My point was not that PM is an inferior chip, but simply that on that particular game, FarCry, the AMD chips seems to have an advantage, according to the benchmarks I did myself.

Games are a not a monolithic whole, some games such as UT2k4 or FarCry, would favor AMD simply because of the heavy FP and BP usage. Other games may favor PM because of the large cache, those that render >1MB frames.

From my experience with various articles, reviews and benches, I can tentatively see that:
  • On average across the spectrum of games, PM + 533 would be slightly faster than an older newcastle and winchester based A64, but some games may tip in AMD's favor.
  • The new San Diego and Venice cores, with revamped memory controller, lower heat, and SSE3 support probably does better clock by clock, by a small amount, over PM in gaming.
  • PM does very well in general applications, or in any application where ALU usage is heavy; and PM usually does better in rendering due to the huge cache.
  • A64 does better in scientific / engineering / compiling , and in certain general apps such as Mozilla.
  • A64 are commercially available at much higher clocks than PM, with FX57 at 2.8 GHz, and has higher memory bandwidth and lower latency (that's primarily why it does better on large data sets).
  • They are both very good lines of processors fulfilling very different purposes, although Turion will put that conventional wisdom to the test; we will see if AMD can ramp the speed of Turion upto 2.4 by the end of the year while staying the TDP limit.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 42
7/11/05 at 7:04am
Thread Starter 
Going back to my orginal question... I should be OK playing games on the laptop anyway !!
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 42
7/11/05 at 11:34am
Can we stop quoting the gamepc review?
An FX-57 would have a hard time beating those P-M numbers from gamepc. If you want TRUE numbers check techreport:

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/20...f/index.x?pg=1

By the way, if you want the BEST professional reviews, only Ace's hardware when Johan deGelas was there could beat Scott Wasson's from Tech Report. But a lot of people here seem to think that Tom's is as good as them.

These numbers from techreport show who's daddy. If you want to believe your specific CPU is the best, go ahead, feel free, just don't spread misinformation.
Reply
Reply
post #31 of 42
7/11/05 at 1:55pm
Why not just look at how the actuall notebook performs, this is after all what matters? Acer Ferrari 4000 is the best stock performing X700 15.4" ~6 portable gaming notebook right now even with it's 333MHz RAM (which I would upgrade to 2GB DDR 400MHz). It does not miss features like 64-bit and SSE3. It is certified and sold with Windows XP 64 Pro in the UK already. But yes if you like me don't need all those features, high end screen, high performance etc then you can always find something cheaper like the Acer TM 4402wlmi or MSI ms-1029. For me PM is not an option to me since it is missing a bunch of features. What matters is the GPU, then look for features. You aint going to notice much diffrence going either way with CPU.
Reply
Reply
post #32 of 42
7/11/05 at 2:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexRuiz
Can we stop quoting the gamepc review?
An FX-57 would have a hard time beating those P-M numbers from gamepc. If you want TRUE numbers check techreport:

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/20...f/index.x?pg=1

By the way, if you want the BEST professional reviews, only Ace's hardware when Johan deGelas was there could beat Scott Wasson's from Tech Report. But a lot of people here seem to think that Tom's is as good as them.

These numbers from techreport show who's daddy. If you want to believe your specific CPU is the best, go ahead, feel free, just don't spread misinformation.
Why do you AMD fanboys only consider reviews using the crippled 855gme chipset legitimate?
Every review that you guys think is legit has the 855 chipset and the others that you dont think are legit are using the 865 or 875 chipsets.
I wonder how the FX57 would perform on a socket 7 board.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 42
7/13/05 at 11:18pm
I am not going to Say either is right. This origional thread was about if games could be played on that laptop and I think the answer is a resounding yes . We cannot decide If you will get 5 more frames per second or 5 less in Doom 3 so I would really be conserned that you might not be able to keep up at 99999fps with a fully decked out SLI desktop.

As far as the reviews go. Nither Review really matters because None of them compaired a Pendium Mobile to a Turion 64. None of them take into account if people are going to be doing Work (ie Engineering, Some Vid Stuff) in 64 bit, and None of them really matters that much because Price is still a major Issue for most users.

Go AMD, Go ATI, Go Intel, Go Motorola, Go Nvidia Go Sony, for as long as you keep going my system will keep going faster.

So wether your are Die Hard Amd or Die Hard Intel Pentium M just remember that Die Hard is an old Action Movie that has been aired on TNN thousands of times and that dosnt need discussed in someones thread on Will this laptop be able to play games.
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 42
7/14/05 at 6:14am
Thread Starter 
The laptop should arrive this morning..

My main uses for it will be:

Internet
Web Design
Editting Images
Odd Game

I think it should work fine for that !!
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 42
7/14/05 at 1:12pm
Please post up a review of that laptop when you get a chance! I'm especially interested in seeing how the battery life of a MT based Turion is.
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 42
7/14/05 at 1:15pm
I second that. Definitely post a review. Specifically I'd be interested in hearing about the build quality, screen quality, and the feel of the keyboard. Thanks
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 42
7/14/05 at 1:16pm
Thread Starter 
Take a look here..
http://www.notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=95130

I'll have better play later or tomorrrow !! But upto now it seems Great
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 42
7/15/05 at 3:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RamIt
Why do you AMD fanboys only consider reviews using the crippled 855gme chipset legitimate?
Every review that you guys think is legit has the 855 chipset and the others that you dont think are legit are using the 865 or 875 chipsets.
I wonder how the FX57 would perform on a socket 7 board.
Perhaps this has something to do with tests saying that the Pentium M@2.0 GHz is competitive with the 3200+ (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=2342&p=15) and tests saying that the Pentium M@1.86 GHz can beat a 3400+. http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_cont...urion64&page=7 The GamePC review even has the entire Pentium M line beating the 3400+ in some game tests. http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_cont...urion64&page=8

Oh, never mind. There's no chance that GamePC would have fake, altered, or otherwise inaccurate results. They're well-known as a reputable site.

*waits for someone to add another grey dot to his rep received page*
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 42
7/15/05 at 3:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by YuriSEAL
Perhaps this has something to do with tests saying that the Pentium M@2.0 GHz is competitive with the 3200+ (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=2342&p=15) and tests saying that the Pentium M@1.86 GHz can beat a 3400+. http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_cont...urion64&page=7 The GamePC review even has the entire Pentium M line beating the 3400+ in some game tests. http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_cont...urion64&page=8

Oh, never mind. There's no chance that GamePC would have fake, altered, or otherwise inaccurate results. They're well-known as a reputable site.

*waits for someone to add another grey dot to his rep received page*
Interesting differences in the test bed setups.


Anandtech:
AMD Athlon 64 Configuration
Socket-939 Athlon 64 CPUs
2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 EL Dual Channel DIMMs 2-2-2-10
NVIDIA nForce4 Reference Motherboard
ATI Radeon X800 XT PCI Express

Intel Pentium M Configuration
Intel Pentium M 725 - 755
2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 EL Dual Channel DIMMs 2-2-2-10
AOpen GMEm-LFS Motherboard ATI Radeon X800 XT AGP

Gamepc:
Amd
DFI LANParty UT NF3250GB Motherboard
nVidia nForce3 250GB Chipset
nVidia Forceware 6.53 Chipset Drivers Installed
GeForce 6800 Ultra AGP

Intel
DFI 855GME-MGF Motherboard
Intel 855GME Chipset
Intel 6.30 Chipset Drivers Installed
GeForce 6800 Ultra AGP

So does anyone know what the performance difference is between the nforce 3 and 4 is? And what about the difference between pci express x800xt and the agp version?

@Yuriseal
Grey dot?
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 42
7/15/05 at 5:52pm
PCI Express and AGP versions are identical for games.

I think that it's someone with low rep trying to neg rep me, but it may also be someone trying to give me positive rep who's too low (I think that those still show up, though.) It's starting to get really frequent.
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 MT-37 - 2 questions..