Pentium M beats up Turion64?

[rgreen83]

I wont try to speculate yet, but is there something about these tests that feels funny to anyone else? http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=turion64&page=1

If Dothans are 20-25% faster at games than Turion64 then why arent ppl flocking to 855GME desktops?

 

[clarkey01]

My understanding is that Turion is just a K8 with better battery life etc. Theres no changes at the architectural level.

I havnt looked at the link yet.Will do now.

 

[dug777]

lol in that review the P-M laid the smack down on the Turion

and paired with the 915 chipset, dual channel DDR2 533 it would have looked even worse for the Turion...

interesting stuff i guess

*madly overclocks his xp2000+ in the hope of breaking it and getting a new computer*

 

[imported_Kensai]

How many people would fork over more than 200$ for an 855 chipset which only supports DDR333 and AGP 4X?
I know I wouldn't. I hope Turion gets better soon or else it'll be pwnage for Intel.

 

[mamisano]

Odd, the Pentium-M also smacked the Athlon 64 around quite handily!

 

[Lonyo]

Yes, the Pentium M tends to do that.
But only in certain areas (like gaming).

As the Anandtech article on Dothan showed, while it lays the smackdown sometimes, it has some VERY weak areas, and before it's an all purpose platform, these would need to be worked on.
As far as a gamers chip, it's awesome.

As a gaming platform and as a general purpose/office machine, the Pentium M does fairly well, but it is in content creation, workstation and media encoding applications that the Pentium M continues to fall behind

Although those numbers do seem to be VERY kind to the Pentium M. Haven't seen it being quite *that* good on most other sites.

 

[rgreen83]

The main thing I dont like about using games to show what a cpu can do is situations like this, they only tested at 1024x768. The problem is that unfortunately we do not game with processors, we game with computers and other parts in the system effect gaming performance, like memory bandwidth and bus bandwidth. I think that if you are gonna show a product in a usage scenario, show it in a real usage scenario, because so many ppl buy 6800 ultras to play at 1024x768 on minimal quality.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

P-M is tough in the notebook sector, no doubt about it. AMD still hasn't made a true mobile CPU yet either.

 

[Jeff7181]

Don't forget a Pentium M 770 will cost no less than $650 (the 765 costs $650 at newegg) and the 3400+ can be had for $220. Add the cost of a motherboard and RAM, and you can build an entire computer around the 3400+ for the cost of the CPU, motherboard, and RAM for a Pentium M setup. Yes it performs better... but if you're not taking into consideration the cost... I bet an FX-55 or a pair of Opteron 252's will perform better than the Pentium M 770.

*EDIT* I really don't understand the point of that article... comparing CPU's from different sectors AND different price ranges.

This just in... a $650 CPU peforms better than a $220 CPU! In other news, water is wet.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Don't forget a Pentium M 770 will cost no less than $650 (the 765 costs $650 at newegg) and the 3400+ can be had for $220. Add the cost of a motherboard and RAM, and you can build an entire computer around the 3400+ for the cost of the CPU, motherboard, and RAM for a Pentium M setup. Yes it performs better... but if you're not taking into consideration the cost... I bet an FX-55 or a pair of Opteron 252's will perform better than the Pentium M 770.

:thumbsup: Still no 64bit support from the p-m either. FarCry and UT2K4 64bit shouldn't be too far off with more coming I should think. If I was buying a notebook now it would still be P-M, for desktop...forget about it!

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Don't forget a Pentium M 770 will cost no less than $650 (the 765 costs $650 at newegg) and the 3400+ can be had for $220. Add the cost of a motherboard and RAM, and you can build an entire computer around the 3400+ for the cost of the CPU, motherboard, and RAM for a Pentium M setup. Yes it performs better... but if you're not taking into consideration the cost... I bet an FX-55 or a pair of Opteron 252's will perform better than the Pentium M 770.

*EDIT* I really don't understand the point of that article... comparing CPU's from different sectors AND different price ranges.

This just in... a $650 CPU peforms better than a $220 CPU! In other news, water is wet.

Well there you go ruining the party for everyone. Oh wait, you didn't....

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Don't forget a Pentium M 770 will cost no less than $650 (the 765 costs $650 at newegg) and the 3400+ can be had for $220. Add the cost of a motherboard and RAM, and you can build an entire computer around the 3400+ for the cost of the CPU, motherboard, and RAM for a Pentium M setup. Yes it performs better... but if you're not taking into consideration the cost... I bet an FX-55 or a pair of Opteron 252's will perform better than the Pentium M 770.

:thumbsup: Still no 64bit support from the p-m either. FarCry and UT2K4 64bit shouldn't be too far off with more coming I should think. If I was buying a notebook now it would still be P-M, for desktop...forget about it!

That's true too... no 64-bit yet. Not a big deal... Intel is probably working on it, albiet slowly as there's no real competition in the mobile computing sector right now. Don't get me wrong... I'm not discounting the great performance of the Pentium M. If Intel would wise up and bring a variation of the Dothan core to the desktop officially, they could pretty much have the market cornered again. They could add 64-bit support, an on die memory controller, and refine the design so it's as efficient as a dual core CPU as the K8.

 

[Zebo]

GamePC is full of it. Some commercial PC sales site..yea right. Thier numbers totally disagree with anands. Where same speed A64 beat dothan in every game, see for yourself. GamePC has dothan winning by 25% in some games and winning every game.
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2342

Whatever, I'll wait for some real laptop reviews from a site I trust not micheals computers or dell or gamepc..

 

[carlosd]

There is no deal with a Pentium M CPU for the desktop. Besides P-M is really weak in some tasks, for that reason it is not able to compete with A64 CPUs.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

AMD is rumored to be going to a dual cored Turion so I imagine Merom or whichever Intel plans on to counter it with ain't far off. Inq says P-M gets a EE version next with much higher TDP that can ramp to 3ghz or beyond. Should keep things interesting

 

[PetNorth]

GamePC ever, ever seems to me misleading and erratic. I don't know how they make their tests.

For example, look at page 4 (power consumition):

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=turion64&page=4

How the hell is it possible? I mean, how the hell is possible that a CPU with a 25W TDP (Turion64 MT-34 1.8 GHz) consumes only 28W less, than a CPU with 89W TDP (like A64 s754 3400+ 2,2)?????

More, they say about temps: 32º full load Turion MT-34 1.8 Vs. 48º full load 3400+ 2.2

When equipped with a Zalman CNPS-7000 ALCU cooler in a desktop environment, our Turion64 MT-34 processor ran exceedingly cool throughout our stress tests. At its absolute peak, we only saw chip temperatures rise to 32°C / 89°F, by far the coolest processor we?ve tested from AMD thus far. Of course, this is when equipped with a fairly high-end CPU cooler in an air-conditioned environment, so when placed in a notebook environment, the chip will, without a doubt, run hotter. Still, for comparison, our Athlon64 3400+ processor ran at 48°C / 120°F with the same cooler on the same motherboard. Going from 81W TDP to 25W TDP offers very impressive improvements on the thermal front.

How is it possible? If it really consumes only 28W less than 3400+, I don't see how can be 18º!!!!!!!! cooler. Something is absolutely wrong here. What? their misleading wats measurements, this is obvious.

Not to mention their ever magical P-M benchmarks. What about Anand Dothan review on desktop?

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2342

I own a P-M with DFI board. A very good system, quiet. But I sure you, Dothan perfomance is what Anand's review reflects.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: carlosd
There is no deal with a Pentium M CPU for the desktop. Besides P-M is really weak in some tasks, for that reason it is not able to compete with A64 CPUs.

You got that right, CHERRY picked. Every test the M did surpurb on in techreports/anandtechs review GamePC includes. Every test it did poorly on they exclude.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Zebo
GamePC is full of it. Some commercial PC sales site..yea right. Thier numbers totally disagree with anands. Where same speed A64 beat dothan in every game, see for yourself. GamePC has dothan winning by 25% in some games and winning every game.
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2342

Whatever, I'll wait for some real laptop reviews from a site I trust not micheals computers or dell or gamepc..

I can't tell what is up from GamePC's review Look at the test setup, they list the P-M with 400DDR@400DDR speed and the nV FW 6.53 drivers for the 855GME :laugh: Some copy&paste snafus?

 

[Zebo]

Some copy&paste snafus?

Probably the whole review is that way (charts). Cept LAME of course where Dothan is a monster.

 

[Zebo]

Guys almost everyone of thier benches disagrees with AT and techreport. I wish I had some time to show this. But I'm mainly looking at similar processor speeds in the three reviews and seeing opposite or strange results

EX: 1

3D studio max

GamePC- 1 test dothan wins by 5%
AT- even over 6 tests with slight edge to A64
TR- even over 2 tests with a slight edge to A64

EX 2

FarCry
Game PC Dothan wins by 30%
AT- NA
TR- A64 wins by 10%

ex 3 UT 2004
Game PC dothan wins by 15%
AT A64 by 5%
TR A64 by 7%
There all like this!!!

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: Zebo


EX 2

FarCry
Game PC Dothan wins by 30%
AT- NA
TR- A64 wins by 10%
q]

SHENS..

Jesus..


Im lost for words........I can just picture Hector in his office " WE'V BEEN SCRWED".

Jesus, is it that hard to find an honest site which doesnt f*ck with the numbers (part from here)

 

[Green Man]

As this page shows (Kit 1 : Pentium-M $925.00) GAmePC is in the business of selling some fairly expensive kits. This isn't a review site, it's a reseller trying to generate excitement about a product that they happen to sell for a huge premium.

 

[Duvie]

Remember the recent article about "sites to buy"..."reviews to be bought"...This is it PPL!!!!!

These fvckers have most likely neutered the Turion and A64 platform like most of the sites seem to be doing recently...Almost like a directive was sent from the mother ship telling them how to do it....Hmmmm INtel????

Edit: I would have to say looking at the encoding page 11 I think it looks about right for the apps they tested.....Remember they are showing 2.13ghz iin this article and 2.0ghz in the other reviews....That is 130 more mhz....

I agree they didn't some of them ore popular encoding like Xvid and Divx which likely would have gone to the A64's.....The 3400+ is a single channel sckt 754 chip....Had they used a 3500+ 2.2ghz DC even with 512kb it could have been different in a few of those test...Also they should have used a clawhammer to give the l2 cache which could have made a percent or 2 more....


I mean the bottom line is I can pick chips, drivers, other hardware components to know the way to manipulate the results...these sites do it all the time..compare ones best against someone elses weaker chip....

 

[Duvie]

Personally I though we knew the PM was maybe a lsight better clock for clock versus the A64 already in a desktop platform...I mean remember they used hardly the top of the A64 lineup.....Really in apps I care about and the pice tag listed the Turion is a better buy cause like the article said in its weak areas (the apps I use) the turion at 130mhz less get close....

Go ahead and extrapolate the data for a 2.2ghz turion and you will see the difference in the pg9-12 is minimal...

WME 9 = Intel +2%
Lame MP3 = Intel +12%
Adobe CS = Intel + 6%
Macro = Intel +7%
Studio Max 7 = Intel +4%
Alias Maya = TIE
Sciencemark AMD +22% , +8%

I wonder what the price diff will be for chips...Will it make it a wash???

The turion is not the strongest platform at a single channel memor controller and it doesn't help it is running cas 3-3-3- at pc3200...WEAK!!!



That all being said we all know the P-M is a nice chip and if Intel fixes some of its weaknesses and dual cores it soon...watch out AMD!!!!

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Duvie
Personally I though we knew the PM was maybe a lsight better clock for clock versus the A64 already in a desktop platform...I mean remember they used hardly the top of the A64 lineup.....Really in apps I care about and the pice tag listed the Turion is a better buy cause like the article said in its weak areas (the apps I use) the turion at 130mhz less get close....

Go ahead and extrapolate the data for a 2.2ghz turion and you will see the difference in the pg9-12 is minimal...

WME 9 = Intel +2%
Lame MP3 = Intel +12%
Adobe CS = Intel + 6%
Macro = Intel +7%
Studio Max 7 = Intel +4%
Alias Maya = TIE
Sciencemark AMD +22% , +8%

I wonder what the price diff will be for chips...Will it make it a wash???

The turion is not the strongest platform at a single channel memor controller and it doesn't help it is running cas 3-3-3- at pc3200...WEAK!!!



That all being said we all know the P-M is a nice chip and if Intel fixes some of its weaknesses and dual cores it soon...watch out AMD!!!!

I wish places would stop using CAS 3 RAM as a standard. The argument that that is what the majority of people use is BS. The majority of people don't use a Raptor... the majority of people don't use a 6800 Ultra... and the majority of people don't use a mobile processor!