Why are some CPU models still blazing fast years later, and others sluggish?

[Mazza558]

My desktop has an AMD 3400+ (2.4ghz) CPU from 2003/2004, and yet any modern desktop I throw at it runs admirably fast. Ubuntu, Kubuntu, XP, Windows 7, even Vista runs well. Indeed, the CPU performance score on Vista is 4.1, which is pretty good considering its age.

And then there's my laptop, bought in mid-2007 with an AMD dual-core CPU (specs in my signature), and when I had Vista on it, performance wasn't impressive. Ubuntu is snappy (especially since Jaunty) but not as fast as on my desktop.

You surely would have thought a system from 2004 would be slower using the same up-to-date software than one from 2007, which is dual core as well?

[kelvin spratt]

Yes thats true for me as well My old AMD 3200 is so much faster than my AMD 6000 Duel core. my windows 7 score is 4.5 on both and 4.1 on a 1.6 AMD dual core laptop so I would not rely on those figurers.

[mips]

You are vague with information. Exact CPU models are needed for both machines.

It could be related to cpu cache.
HD speed is a big factor and is influenced by rpm, I/O speed (bus) & cache.

[Delever]

Dual core - what speed? Since many times only one core is used. As for it being less snappy - again, can RAM cause a difference? Maybe laptop GPU is also weaker? Too many factors to decide that is it only CPU to blame. But I think if you test cpu speed with some multi-threaded application, laptop would win.

[Skripka]

Dual core - what speed? Since many times only one core is used. As for it being less snappy - again, can RAM cause a difference? Maybe laptop GPU is also weaker? Too many factors to decide that is it only CPU to blame. But I think if you test cpu speed with some multi-threaded application, laptop would win.

I think in this case the difference is that the AMD3200 was a single core versus modern multicore. Ergo in a single application which is only single-threaded, the AMD3200 will likely b faster than most multi-core chips.

[BGFG]

I don't think it's hardware but code. OS's are lagging far behing the capability of modern processors. I thinks Mazza's post shows part of that. Even though 64bit software exists, they are not yet taking true advantage of the full capabilities of new processors.

I'm no developer but that is what i think.

[wieman01]

Most laptop computers have sluggish hard drives which makes the comparison between Desktop & Laptop PCs a little moot. But I agree, some models fare better than others.

If you aren't a gamer, you can work on a 5 year old PC easily without too much hassle.

[Mazza558]

Most laptop computers have sluggish hard drives which makes the comparison between Desktop & Laptop PCs a little moot. But I agree, some models fare better than others.

If you aren't a gamer, you can work on a 5 year old PC easily without too much hassle.

Well, my HDD has pretty slow speeds too, but that doesn't seem to affect much.

The laptop is 1.8ghz and on both PCs I'm only using 32bit software.

[Redache]

Well, my HDD has pretty slow speeds too, but that doesn't seem to affect much.

The laptop is 1.8ghz and on both PCs I'm only using 32bit software.

It all depends on far more than the CPU. But if we focus on the CPU alone, Laptops have lower powered CPU's when compared to Desktop ones, even now there's a lot of difference between the inherent power of a Desktop CPU vs a Laptop CPU. It's not all about Clock Speed. The Front Side Bus speed has a role to play in this, although with AMD this sort of doesn't apply quite so much.

Due to the power stepping that's built into Laptop Processors it's possible that your laptop is throttling the Processor speed in order to save power. This might not be apparent on modern Processors that run at 2Ghz+ but as yours is 1.8, it might be stepping it down as far as 6-700Mhz which would certainly feel slower.

I recommend trying a modern Desktop processor and then making a comparison, as that will prove to you that Processing power has increased considerably in the last 5 years!

[gn2]

Off the top of my head, a few variables that can play a part in PC performance:

CPU architecture
CPU freq
CPU cache
GPU architecture
GPU freq
RAM dedicated to GPU or shared
RAM amount dedicated to GPU
RAM type
RAM speed
HDD type
HDD cache
HDD speed
Mobo chipset architecture
Mobo chipset freq
Ambient air temperature
Quality of power supply

That's before you even consider software.

Think of cores like a highway.
Single core 100mph highway has one lane and will pass X amount of traffic at 100mph max
Dual core 50mph highway will pass 2x the amount of traffic but at 50mph
Both highways pass the same amount of traffic in the same time even though the dual lane one goes at half the speed.

All you need to do with the dual-core is throw enough traffic at it to fill the lanes up, often that means multi-tasking.

[WatchingThePain]

Deleted

[3rdalbum]

Desktops are so much more powerful than laptops. They can pump out heat and chew through power without any ill effects. Laptops, on the other hand, have to use low-power components (i.e. low performance) so they don't drain your batteries or overheat.