Originally posted by: electrosoccertux
Originally posted by: RedBeard
Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
Originally posted by: electrosoccertux
....
Haha. WOW. You should post with your brain a bit more.
And your notebook experience & technical knowledge comes from.....a box of wheaties?
Thanks for setting electro
moronsoccertux straight. The turions do very well for battery life. They usually do about as good as centrinos (which says a lot). Especially the MT line. I recently purchased a Turion ML-34, and I have been very pleased with it's performance. I went from a Pentium M 715 btw.
Their battery life is OK, but not "very good" as you say. Not comparable to a Pentium M.
Stuff it fanboy. The Pentium M gets past 7 hours. The Turion tops out at 4:30. And thats not even on wireless.
Not to mention we're talking about a Turion X2, so the difference will be inflated approx 2x.
Wow, you really are an idiot. First of all, you're referring to tests by a user @ NBR. NBR's reviews and articles are half-assed at best, and the user reviews are even worse. The results of those tests are both unclear and cannot be accurate as stated. There would have to be some extremely messed up testing circumstances for that to happen that way. Frankly, I think that guy must have used the 6-cell for one and 12-cell for the other. My gf has a Dothan dv1000 and it gets 6-7 hours of normal usage on the 12-cell; the 6-cell would yield no more than 3-4 hours if that.
How do you know I ask? It has something to do with that thing I like to call
my job.
First, let's take a look at Pentium M (Dothan) vs Turion 64. You can read your heart out to actually learn something
true here:
http://www.laptoplogic.com/resources/detail.php?id=17
But let's cut to the chase. Two 100% identical notebooks. Same screen, same HDD, same battery, same GPU with same drivers, etc. Gee, what do we see here:
http://www.laptoplogic.com/resources/detail.php?id=17&page=15
I think we see the torch being passed between Dothan and Turion fairly steadily. If you read the whole article, you'll see that it appears Dothan uses less power under heavier load circumstances (which makes sense, the Dothan architecture is much more power optimized in the small details than Turion) while Turion is more efficient in the less intensive circumstances. So, now that we've proved you wrong about single cores, let's look at Turion 64 X2 and Core Duo (Yonah).
First, let's assess this statement you made:
Not to mention we're talking about a Turion X2, so the difference will be inflated approx 2x.
That right there tells each and every single person reading this post that you're a bloody moron. Dual cores does
NOT mean twice the power consumption. Don't believe me? Look at Anandtech's dual core benchmarks of any dual core chip: power consumption is inceased very conservatively, as power saving technologies and smaller manufacturing processes allow for amazing power consumption reduction. If you still don't believe me, head over the CPU forum to and post about how much more power consumption dual cores have. Please.
Now we are in fact preparing an article
directly comparing two identical systems using Core Duo & Turion 64 X2, but until then I can only make less accurate indirect comparisons, but still rather valid. Let's look at these two systems.
HP dv1000t: 14" glossy widescreen, Core Duo, integrated graphics (Intel)
http://www.laptoplogic.com/reviews/detail.php?id=120&part=glance
MSI S271: 14" glossy widescreen, Turion 64 X2, integrated graphics (ATI)
http://www.laptoplogic.com/reviews/detail.php?id=128&part=glance
Now, onto the battery life.
MSI S271 Office Productivity battery life: 3.93 hours
HP dv1000t Office Productivity battery life: 4.12 hours
MSI S271 battery capacity: 63.36 Wattage Hours (Whr)
HP dv1000t battery capacity: 43.2 Whr
MSI S271 Turion 64 X2 average power consumption: 63.36Whr/3.93 hours = 16.12 watts
HP dv1000t Core Dou average power consumption: 43.2Whr/4.12 hours = 10.48 watts
And for comparison:
Acer Ferrari Turion 64 average power consumption: 71.04Whr/3.73 hours = 19.04 watts
Acer TravelMate Dothan average power consumption: 71.04Whr/3.75 hours = 18.94 watts
Now, obviously we can see here that Turion 64 X2 (in an unofficial, not ideal comparison)
does consume more power than Core Duo. However it is not only the CPU that makes this difference. Intel's GMA950 is likely more power efficient than ATI's Radeon Xpress 1150 IGP, as well as the chipset. The screens are also not identical, so power consumption will differ there. Personally, I've been disappointed with Turion 64 X2. But I'm not surprised: Core Duo (Yonah) was an entirely new architecture only mildly based on its previous generation (Dothan). Turion 64 X2 is basically a low power Athlon 64 X2, similar to the Energy Efficient Athlon 64 X2's (Same TDP actually) available on the new AM2 platform. AMD won't have anything new and exciting in the mobile arena until its next generation mobile chip, codenamed Bulldog.
Anyway, back on topic:
I know, it's embarassing. You've been proven wrong. You have two choices here: continue with your infantile behavior, being unnecessarily ugly to people and whining about fanboys & the such. Or you can just shut your cheeks before you talk out of your ass some more. Hell, in fact I'd say an apology is in order. No one here was rude to you until you started talking sh!t about sh!t that you clearly don't know anything about. So either apologize or tuck your tail behind your legs and go back to high school junior.