Go Back   Computer Forums > General Computing > Hardware
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-03-2005, 04:07 PM   #11
Baseband Member
 
allanpotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 37
Default Re: difference between cpu types

WHO SAYS PENTIUM M IS JUST FOR NOTEBOOKS!!!
Sorry, but this is getting me really annoyed. Pentium M is not just for notebooks, you can buy ATX motherboards for desktops which take the Pentium M chips!!

Why I hear you ask, when normal desktop processors are much more powerful? Well because Pentium M's are quite possibly the best performance gaming chip currently available!!!

I didn't believe it either, when I was told they destroy AMD at gaming- but then I had a go on one. For £350 you can get a top of the range Pentium M which performs as well as a top end athlon (4000 or FX55). It is also easily overclockable, consumes less power and even better, gives off far less heat. This means you don't need heavy duty, noisy cooling allowing for a super-silent, super-fast PC at a much cheaper price. Intel are king for gaming and as soon as the dual-core Pentium M comes out, I'll be swapping my Amd X2 4800 for one!
__________________

__________________
Asus P5W DH Deluxe/ Corsair 4GB DDR2 XMS2 Dominator PC2-8888C4/ Gainward BLISS GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB + 'secret'/ Intel Core 2 Quadro Extreme Edition QX6700 @ 3.6ghz/ 4x Western Digital Raptor X 150GB/ Swiftech H20-220 Apex Ultra+ watercooling
allanpotter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2005, 04:24 PM   #12
Golden Master
 
jac006's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,810
Send a message via AIM to jac006
Default Re: difference between cpu types

Yeah, I agree. I've seen small form factor pc's that use the pent. M and it does well. It consumes minimal energy, doesn't require a honkin fan to keep it cool, and performs pretty well.
__________________

__________________
Macbook Pro and Logitech z5500s. All you really need.
jac006 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2005, 07:42 PM   #13
Daemon Poster
 
acphenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 667
Send a message via MSN to acphenom Send a message via Yahoo to acphenom
Default Re: difference between cpu types

The Pentium M is the best choice for gaming, but it still gets floored by K8's in most tasks. I don't game, so i think i'd rather have a Turion; preferably an MT.

And yes, i do have benchmarks, this time.

http://www.laptoplogic.com/resources/articles/42/1/1/
__________________
Windows XP Pro 17" LCD Monitor (1280 x 1024)
nForce3 250 Chipset Athlon 64 2800+ w/ C'n'Q
1 x 512MB DDR400 CL3 SDRAM 40GB IDE 7,200rpm HDD (8MB Cache)
nVidia GeForce MX420 64MB PCI On-Board Audio
acphenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2005, 10:41 PM   #14
Golden Master
 
ISOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 12,208
Default Re: difference between cpu types

Pentium M totally is the BEST CPU by Intel. Intel is so confident in their efficient architecture that they are using that as the model for their future CPUs.

The next generation Intel CPU is going to combine the strengths of the company’s NetBurst and Pentium M architectures plus added new features. The new cores Intel's working on are the Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest. They are new processors for the notebook, desktop and server platforms. These CPUs are designed on Intel’s 65nm technology manufacturing process. Intel also has more than 10 processor projects going on that contain four (quad-core) or more processor cores per chip!!!!! Crazy....
__________________
*Fact: Microsoft Window's Blue Screen of Death vs Computerforums.org's White Screen of Death. Which is worse?
ISOwner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2005, 10:50 PM   #15
Daemon Poster
 
acphenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 667
Send a message via MSN to acphenom Send a message via Yahoo to acphenom
Default Re: difference between cpu types

Intel looks to be improving big-time, with integrated memory controllers being implemented, along with graphics and voltage controllers, and if you're right, corolla, it looks even better. AMD's gonna have a fight on their hands, finally.
__________________
Windows XP Pro 17" LCD Monitor (1280 x 1024)
nForce3 250 Chipset Athlon 64 2800+ w/ C'n'Q
1 x 512MB DDR400 CL3 SDRAM 40GB IDE 7,200rpm HDD (8MB Cache)
nVidia GeForce MX420 64MB PCI On-Board Audio
acphenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2005, 10:58 PM   #16
Golden Master
 
ISOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 12,208
Default Re: difference between cpu types

Yeah, but while Intel's doing all that, AMD has something more up its sleeves too. AMD aren't disclosing too much info right now and are pretty tight lipped. Their R&D department, will have some great stuff to combat them. As far as dual core goes, AMD just totally owns!!!!

I mean read this part here:..."Where AMD differs a tremendous amount from Intel in the dual core department is that AMD did not just “glue” two of their high performance processors together. In fact, if you talk to Fred Weber, AMD CTO, he will tell you that AMD has been planning for dual core CPUs for a long time and the fact of the matter is that AMD’s superior dual core design backs up that statement. AMD uses what they call Direct Connect architecture. Instead of two processor cores being saddled to one bus and run to a single memory controller as we see with Intel dual core technology, we have to remember that AMD Athlon 64 processors have the memory controller on the CPU die itself and therefore no “front side bus” is needed. So each CPU on our dual core X2 has a much quicker route to the memory controller as with current Athlon 64 processors. Also, each CPU core does have its own 1MB of full speed L2 cache and the L1 caches are of course independent as well. So still the biggest benefit to the entire K8 core system is shining through in AMD’s Athlon X2 line in the ways of HyperTransport and its extremely wide bus width when compared to Intel’s dual core 800MHz bus”.

The X2 may be awesome for their own purpose (multitask), but when it comes to gaming, the FX still rules:..."Athlon 64 X2 4800+ appears much faster than its counterpart from the Athlon 64 family. And if it were not for the crazily high price of the new Athlon 64 X2 4800+ exceeding $1,000, I would definitely call this processor a great choice. Especially, since it doesn’t fall behind its single-core fellows in any applications. Keeping in mind the price of the new Athlon 64 X2, we have to admit that these CPUs can so far be regarded as one more excellent choice for wealthy hardware enthusiasts, just like Athlon 64 FX. Those who care most about the performance in applications other than games will definitely pay due attention to the new AMD Athlon 64 X2 processor family. Extreme gamers, however, are most likely to stay dedicated to Athlon 64 FX”.
__________________

__________________
*Fact: Microsoft Window's Blue Screen of Death vs Computerforums.org's White Screen of Death. Which is worse?
ISOwner is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0