On CBS MoneyWatch: 5 Holiday Shopping Tips
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 20 of 31:
Next »
« Previous
The Pentium M does pretty well...
The only reason one runs better than the other is merely due to architectural reasons. The Athlon64 and the Pentium 4 are two totally different animals. It has to do with the internal workings of the CPU that determine how well it performs in 64-bit.

The Pentium 4 and the Athlon64 are two very, very, VERY, different animals. EM64T and AMD64 are not. They are practically identical, for all intents and purposes, they are.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1736

http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q1/64-bits/index.x?pg=1

2.) GamePC seems to disagree. The Turion64 is nothing special -- it's a low power socket 754 chip based on the K8 architecture.

3.) Judging it's performance there, the Pentium M is doing DAMN good. A few times it's hanging out with the nosebleed section of Pentiums (3-3.2 GHz) but more often than not, that Pentium M is performing right where it's price says it should, and sometimes even better than that, at times outperforming a 3.8 GHz processor or even coming inches behind the legendary FX-55.

The Pentium M doesn't support 64-bit yet, and as seen by that VERY Anandtech review, it's something of an architecturally challenged chip at the moment. It's SSE instructions leave something to be desired (which will be given to us in the form of Yonah). It performs, quite honestly, quite impressively for a laptop processor. In addition, Anandtech themselves state that a very important reason it doesn't perform above and beyond the call of duty is because of it's SSE support. Furthermore, it performs the way it does, easily consuming half of what those other processors consume.

Yonah will fix the "SSE Problem" in the current generation Pentium M's, as well as add SSE3 support for them. It will be the first dual core to sport a shared cache.
Posted by: A_Pickle   Posted on: 10/13/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

There's nothing dizzy about it whatsoever; I proudly use AMD.  HypnoToad | 10/12/05
Me, too...but if not for INTEL, AMD would  Feldwebel Wolfenstool | 10/12/05
AMD is better in every respect  ONEstar | 10/12/05
Thanks to your outsanding contribution, Intel ...  ShadeTree | 10/12/05
better  ONEstar | 10/12/05
I wholeheartedly agree  jgmsys@... | 10/12/05
Running AMD now  CobraA1 | 10/12/05
AMD all the way  kokuryu | 10/12/05
Running Intel.  A_Pickle | 10/12/05
Running Intel...  Zinoron | 10/12/05
Ehhh...  A_Pickle | 10/12/05
Re: Running Intel...  Thored | 12/22/05
RE: Good point but,,,  Krazyken39 | 10/13/05
INTEL code names are more perplexing than German enigma machine  sharikou | 10/12/05
Um...  A_Pickle | 10/12/05
AMD's 64 bit is faster  sharikou | 10/12/05
Kinda sorta...  A_Pickle | 10/13/05
EM64T is not AMD64!  sharikou | 10/13/05
Anandtech on Pentium-M and P4  sharikou | 10/13/05
The Pentium M does pretty well...  A_Pickle | 10/13/05
Hmm... Intel or AMD  Krazyken39 | 10/12/05
Intel changes more often than Intel  toadlife | 10/12/05
RE: True but,  Krazyken39 | 10/13/05
Which chip for Apple?  frabjous | 10/12/05
Did Jobs do some benchmarks  sharikou | 10/12/05
substantially?  JoeMama_z | 10/13/05
AMD does have a 6 watt fanless 32 bit CPU  sharikou | 10/13/05
Um...  A_Pickle | 10/13/05
VooDooPC CTO: AMD better in every possible way  sharikou | 10/12/05
Heh.  A_Pickle | 10/13/05
Says the owner of an overpriced PC company...  A_Pickle | 10/13/05

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here