Pentium M beats up Turion64?

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Viditor
Just compare these 2 benchmarks from GamePC...

Turion Review
P4 EE Review

Note that according to them, a stock P-M blows the doors off of a P4 EE that has been overclocked to 4.0GHz on the exact same benchmark. In fact, it performs the same as an FX-55...

There be a foul stench here...

Heehee good find V, Even more so since the video card is the same and setup is the same. F Frauds.

I don't see a connection here. Can someone please explain what this means?
The only obvious discrepancy I see here is comparing the AMD Athlon64 3200+ (2.0 GHz) on each chart under HL2 Airboat Chase 1024 x 768.

On the P4EE review, the AMD Athlon64 3200+ put out 82.2 fps
On the Turion64 review, the AMD Athlon64 3200+ puts out 87.5 fps

1. Why is it different from one review to the other.
2. What am I missing? Aren't the platforms/video cards identical?
3. What does the P4EE's performance have to do with the P-M in this situation?

Anyone? Help out please.

 

[68GTX]

On the P4EE review, the AMD Athlon64 3200+ put out 82.2 fps
On the Turion64 review, the AMD Athlon64 3200+ puts out 87.5 fps

1. Why is it different from one review to the other.

Different 3200+ CPUs (Socket 754/939), Different Motherboards, and Different Graphics Drivers. Plus acceptable margin of error.

 

[Keysplayr]

K. Thanks for answering 1 & 2. Anyone want to take a stab at 3?

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: 68GTX

On the P4EE review, the AMD Athlon64 3200+ put out 82.2 fps
On the Turion64 review, the AMD Athlon64 3200+ puts out 87.5 fps

1. Why is it different from one review to the other.

Different 3200+ CPUs (Socket 754/939), Different Motherboards, and Different Graphics Drivers. Plus acceptable margin of error.

Edit: he was right I was wrong...I thought it said 512kb on both of the 3200+ chips...

 

[Snoop]

Anyone who has been around a while has noticed GamePC reviews are heavily biased and IMO have outright lies in them.

There are tons of threads about this if you search for them. This is a snip from a thread on their Athlon FX vs P4 EE review:
Thread
IE:All tests done at 1024x768, same video card, ATI x800:
3.4 EE vs Athlon FX 55
Doom3
Gamepc- EE 121.5 - FX 123.3 ---FX by 1.5%
Anand- EE 87.9 - FX 102.5 ---FX by 16.6%
CounterStrike Source
Gamepc- EE 56.86 - FX 61.06 ---FX by 7.3%
Anand- EE 160.7 - FX 190.3 ---FX by 18.4%
Unreal Tournament 2004
Gamepc- EE 234.4 - FX 253.2 ---FX by 8%
Anand- EE 61.1 - FX 74 ---FX by 21.1%
Halo
Gamepc- EE 94.1 - FX 96.9 ---FX by 2.9%
Anand- EE 91.4 - FX 106.6 ---FX by 16.6%
Battlefield Vietnam
Gamepc- EE 175.3 - FX 173.2 ---EE by 1.2%
Anand- EE 240 - FX 240 ---Same
FarCry
Gamepc- EE 130.3 - FX 139 --- FX by 6.6%
Anand- EE 140.9 - FX 158.9 --- FX by 12.7%

Their is something definately wrong with these numbers.

 

[68GTX]

What the heck is wrong with you...they are both the same 3200+ 2.0ghz models are only sckt 939s

From the system configuration pages of the P4EE, and Turion reviews mentioned above:


AMD Athlon64 3200+ (2.0 GHz) - 128k L1, 512k L2 Cache

Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe Motherboard

nVidia nForce4-SLI Chipset

nVidia GeForce 6800 Ultra 256MB PCI Express x16

nVidia Forceware 71.84 Drivers Installed

=========================================

AMD Athlon64 3200+ (2.0 GHz) - 128k L2, 1024k L2 Cache

DFI LANParty UT NF3250GB Motherboard

nVidia nForce3 250GB Chipset

nVidia GeForce 6800 Ultra AGP 8x 256MB

nVidia Forceware 71.89 Drivers Installed

 

[Duvie]

Hmmmmm....So he used all clawhammers if that is what they were even called backed then....WOW!!! sorry 68GTX.....I see what you mean...That means he truly did use the latest of the A64 components versus the newest of the mobile components....Myabe a put together a review of my new A64 3000+ at stock and instead of comparing it to my 2.4c@3.0ghz which rocks it in encoding and some rendering I can substitue in my P4b 2.4ghz@3.06 speeds...I mean that is fair, right???

It appears from a search of pricewatch there is like 2 vendors who still sell those and some of the links say notebook cpu for the 1.8ghz 3000+ with 1mb cache...