PDA

View Full Version : Too... many... processors



jpeddicord
November 5th, 2006, 08:57 PM
I am going to buy a laptop in the near future, and I was looking into different processor brands between Intel and AMD. There is just too many to choose from.

I already know of the differences between the Intel processors, but I can't seem to find any information between Turionx64x2 and Core 2 Duos. I generally prefeer Intel processors because I wouldn't need to get a graphics card and it has OSS drivers.

Which is more powerful? Core 2 Duo, or Turion x64x2?
Which is more power saving?

:-k

Dual Cortex
November 5th, 2006, 09:04 PM
C2D wins the battery life battle and performance battle against AMD.
Core Duo (i'll call it CD) life battle against the C2D... but not much, while C2D wins the perfomance value.
Though, the longer battery life of a CD -from reviews, etc. - is not worth the performance difference.

warlorddagaz
November 5th, 2006, 09:47 PM
C2D wins the battery life battle and performance battle with AMD.

I heard C2D was best for performance, unless this was for desktops.

B0rsuk
November 5th, 2006, 10:07 PM
You may complain now, but trust me, you'll be amazed once we get enough firepower to use realtime raytracing in games. Which (according to Intel) will start at about 4 cores.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raytracing

Dual Cortex
November 5th, 2006, 11:47 PM
I heard C2D was best for performance, unless this was for desktops.

I should have said against AMD.
](*,)
I'll fix that right now.

KaroSHi
November 5th, 2006, 11:53 PM
I am going to buy a laptop in the near future, and I was looking into different processor brands between Intel and AMD. There is just too many to choose from.

I already know of the differences between the Intel processors, but I can't seem to find any information between Turionx64x2 and Core 2 Duos. I generally prefeer Intel processors because I wouldn't need to get a graphics card and it has OSS drivers.

Which is more powerful? Core 2 Duo, or Turion x64x2?
Which is more power saving?

:-kim confused, why does buying AMD mean you need a gfx card when intel doesent? :s

~LoKe
November 5th, 2006, 11:55 PM
Core 2 Duo is dominating everything out right now.

Dual Cortex
November 5th, 2006, 11:59 PM
Probably because it comes with Intel Integrated graphics.


You may complain now, but trust me, you'll be amazed once we get enough firepower to use realtime raytracing in games. Which (according to Intel) will start at about 4 cores.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raytracing

Reminds me of my 'ex-wallpaper':
http://dualscreenwallpaper.com/wallpapers/abstract/qubiq_room_5.jpg
Caption: Red Walls
Is this where they put crazy people?

~LoKe
November 6th, 2006, 12:02 AM
Probably because it comes with Intel Integrated graphics.

Processors don't come with integrated graphics. :confused:

Dual Cortex
November 6th, 2006, 12:06 AM
...
But probably the INTEL-powered laptops he's looking at have INTEL integrated graphics. Sure there are AMD laptops with ATI's integrated graphics... but... well I guess he doesn't know... anyway who knows what he was talking about, just a guess :P.

~LoKe
November 6th, 2006, 12:07 AM
...
But probably the INTEL-powered laptops he's looking at have INTEL integrated graphics. Sure there are AMD laptops with ATI's integrated graphics... but... well I guess he doesn't know... anyway who knows what he was talking about, just a guess :P.

If he had integrated graphics, it would be on an Intel board which wouldn't even support an AMD processor. So not only would he have to buy a new graphics card, but a new motherboard as well.

Dual Cortex
November 6th, 2006, 12:23 AM
If he had integrated graphics, it would be on an Intel board which wouldn't even support an AMD processor. So not only would he have to buy a new graphics card, but a new motherboard as well.

I think you are very confused my friend.
Sorry man I really think you are :p.

He said he was somewhat leaning towards Intel because.. well, Intel powered laptops, lots of times, come with an Intel chipset and Intel Integrated graphics. Whereas (usually) AMD laptops with integrated graphics use an ATI chip.
AND, I'm reasoning he prefers Intel's Integrated graphics over ATI's because of the fact that the latter is not THAT supported on the Linux world.

HW_Hack
November 6th, 2006, 12:25 AM
Intel is the current power miser in both mobile CPUs / Chipsets -- If you just need decent graphics than Intel chipset graphics will work ok - but go for 1GB of Memory - and pick combinations of the fastest bus speeds ( front-side-bua and memory buds) as both of these will help overall gfx performance

JayTee
November 6th, 2006, 02:36 AM
I was looking at laptops and doing some comparisons not too long ago and I'd have to go with the Core 2 Duo. This is a better processor than the Core Duo but most manufacturers haven't added it to their laptop product lines yet. I also saw a few Core Duo laptops out there that had Nvidia graphics chipsets instead of Intel's on the mobo.

jdong
November 6th, 2006, 05:23 AM
From all the benchmarks I've seen, the Core * Duos beat out Turion X2's. However, in my opinion both processors offer so much processing muscle that you are

Speaking as a general rule of thumb, notebooks with the Centrino brand will work better with Linux than AMD's Turion notebooks. This is exceptionally true if the AMD comes with ATI integrated graphics, as those work terribly with Linux (Linux can't figure out where ATI's reserved shared memory block is, so Linux and the graphics card trample over each other, leading to full system lockups)

With that said, unless you do very careful research and are able to test before-hand, I would lean more towards an Intel Centrino-branded laptop.

AlexC_
November 6th, 2006, 08:40 AM
I recently upgraded from an AMD X2 3800 to an Intel Core 2 Duo and my C2D is twice as fast in rendering, I'm not sure what the Turion are like but man those C2D's are mad

jpeddicord
November 7th, 2006, 11:04 PM
From all the benchmarks I've seen, the Core * Duos beat out Turion X2's. However, in my opinion both processors offer so much processing muscle that you are

Speaking as a general rule of thumb, notebooks with the Centrino brand will work better with Linux than AMD's Turion notebooks. This is exceptionally true if the AMD comes with ATI integrated graphics, as those work terribly with Linux (Linux can't figure out where ATI's reserved shared memory block is, so Linux and the graphics card trample over each other, leading to full system lockups)

With that said, unless you do very careful research and are able to test before-hand, I would lean more towards an Intel Centrino-branded laptop.
Ah, I will keep that in mind.

And yes, I meant that Intel motherboards don't require a graphics card for decent performance, whereas AMD, you must get one. Otherwise you get extremely bad integrated SiS graphic processors.

(Sorr for posting a little late, I actually forgot I had made this topic!)