AMD Athlon 64 X2 Mobile QL-62

Can anyone tell me how the AMD Athlon 64 X2 Mobile QL-62 processor is?
I'm currently looking at a HP laptop with that processor and I'm mostly going to us the laptop for watching movies, surfing and listening to music. No gaming at all. Will that processor be enough for me?

 

Even a base AMD will be fine for the tasks you mentioned.
You can buy a fast HDD which would make Windows and apps more responsive.

 

The harddrive that comes with the computer is a SATA 250gb 5400 rpm one. Will that one do?

 

Most new laptops come with the WD2500BEVT and the likes. So, yeah it'll be fine.
IMO, HDDs are really cheap these days. You could get a 320GB 7200RPM HDD which peaks at 90MB/s, and are currently the fastest, for $100 or less online. And you could use the original drive as an external storage solution.

(BTW, do you like AMDs, or you didn't find a good notebook with an Intel CPU ? )

 

I couldn't find a good one with an Intel CPU for a good price. I think I'll go with the AMD one then. Thanks for your help.

 

Ohh, ok. Just FYI, most high-end AMDs are comparable to the Intel Pentium Dual-Cores, or the base 'Merom' Core 2 Duos, which are generally cheap, and better.

 

The high-end AMD's are far better than the crappy pentium dual-cores. IIRC, subract a couple hundred megahertz from the AMD to get approximate core 2 duo performance. Like amd turion 2.3ghz aprox. equal to 2ghz core 2 duo or so.
But in contrast, you do get less heat and less power consumption with an intel processor though.

 

Ok, AMD fan-boy, I take that back - AMDs are not crappy....

BTW, there is a CPU benchmark list here, and is good for general CPU comparisons....

 

AMD currently offers three different models of processor- the Athlon X2 (QL-model #'s), Turion X2 (RM-model #'s) and Turion X2 Ultra (ZM-model #'s).

Interestingly, the QL-62 you mention is almost identical to the RM-70 from the Turion X2 line. Both run at 2.0GHz and have the same HyperTransport speed and same size L2 cache. The only difference is the TDP, or wattage, which is 31 for the RM-70 and just 25 for the QL-62.

It's my understanding that the lower TDP for the QL-62 indicates that it runs cooler than the RM-70? If that isn't correct, I would appreciate any clarification on the matter!

Back to the original question, I've used a Toshiba Satellite which had the 2.0GHz RM-70. It was perfectly adequate for routine internet, email and basic multimedia use.

Just curious, which HP model are you considering?

 

For lower TDP, "max/load" temps are lower. There is no significant variation in idle temps.

 

Looking at the HP-Compaq 6735-b, I just noticed the same thing - the RM70 and QL-62 appear to be identical specwise, though the QL-62 has a lower TDP on the Wikipedia listing. But the QL-62 is $33 cheaper. It does score about 100 points (13%) lower on the aforelinked CPU benchmark page, but I'm not sure why. They're both AMD Lion - does the QL-62 has some sort of architectural limit anyway?

 

Somone mentioned that AMD offers 3 models of AMD QL- RM- and ZM- My last laptop used a TL series, and that cpu was a pretty recent release I think, TL-64 2.2 ghz 65nm

 

It was mentioned by one of the mods a few months ago that the QL cpus have a ram speed limitation of DDR2-667.

As for the TDP, I thought all QL's were 35w?

 

This one is driving me up the wall as well. You can get a great budget laptop right now that has the QL-62 or a Pentium T3400 for the same price (about 400 clams). I ordered the Compaq Presario CQ60-210US with the QL, and there is the CQ60-216DX with the Pentium. Good luck to anyone who can find an actual performance chart on these. Best I could find was this http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php which don't include the T3400, yet the T3200 is there and appears to be a faster processor than the QL62. I'm actually considering canceling my order for the QL and going for the Pentium, especially since the Pentium has support for Intels turbo memory. The only thing I can see other than processor specs on these laptops are the video cards, the QL has Nvidias 8200m and the Pentium has Intels GMA X4500MHD.

 

AMD has a comparison chart that shows the QL62 is only 25W. This whole thing really is confusing.

http://products.amd.com/en-us/NotebookCPUSideBySide.aspx?id=438&id=470&id=18&id=6

 

Hands down, the CQ60-216DX (Intel) will be a superior performer in all processor-intensive tasks (multi-tasking, in particular). Unlike previous iterations of Pentium Dual-Core processors, the T3200/T3400 are essentially Core 2 Duo models. The T3200 is the T5750 (C2D) with half (1mb) the L2 cache memory. The T3400 is the T5850 (C2D) with half (1mb) the L2 cache memory.

According to the benchmark results I've seen, the T3400 even scores higher than the 2.0GHz Core 2 Duo T5800 (most prevalent mainstream CPU in budget/mainstream laptops).

Here's a review of a laptop that uses the T3200 and Intel GMA 4500M graphics. It's not a Compaq, but gives you an idea of the level of performance you can expect- Acer Aspire w/ T3200

The 2.0GHz AMD Athlon QL-62 has the same specifications as the AMD Turion X2 RM-70, except the Wattage is 31W for the RM-70 and 25W for the QL-62. The only reviews/benchmark results I've seen are for the 1.9GHz QL-60 and the RM-70, none for the QL-62 yet. In any case, the performance of both models lags substantially behind Intel processors with similar clock speeds.

Here are reviews of the Compaq CQ50-115NR (2.0GHz RM-70) and CQ50-215NR (1.9GHz QL-62), both of which have the nVIDIA 8200M G integrated graphics. The CQ60-210US will perform very similarly to these (and the results aren't impressive)-
CQ50-115NR
CQ50-215NR

I'd definitely choose the Intel-based model! However, there are a few minor features that are included on the AMD-based CQ60-210US that are NOT on the CQ60-216dx:
O/S: 216dx: Windows Vista Home Basic, 210us: Vista Home Premium
Optical Drive: both have DVD RW, 210us also includes LightScribe capability
Card Reader: 210us has a 5-in-1 Media Card Reader, 216dx doesn't
on the plus side, the 216dx does have an extra GB of RAM (3GB total).

 

the CPU might be inferior slightly, but come on, Radeon HD3200 is soo much better than 4500MHD

 

Unfortunately, HP seems to be the only vendor pairing AMD processors with the ATI Radeon Mobility HD 3200...and only on Pavilion models. The HP G60 and all Compaq models with AMD processors have the nVIDIA 8200M G, a previous-generation integrated graphics solution. Toshiba uses a slightly less powerful ATI 3100 on their AMD-based models.

The goal in using AMD processors, especially the Athlon X2 (QL-6x) models, is to reduce cost. The outdated nVIDIA chipset and requisite 8200M G are apparently less expensive than the ATI chipset with the 3100 or 3200.

As they say, you get what you pay for!

 

This is true, but a greater proportion of people will take a superior CPU over a superior GPU. Not to mention that AMD's Athlon is sooo outdated... it is based on the same old architecture they've been using for years. Ditto with the Turion; AMD desperately needs a completely new architecture to compete with Intel's mobile line-up.

 

Did some more research on the mobile gpu's and found this site for comparisons http://www.notebookcheck.net/Comparison_of_Grafic_Cards_update.130.0.html which is now in my favs for online charts. With this cq60 HP Laptop,
the Nvidia 8200 brings the sd reader with it, but the Intel 4500 MHD has higher performance. Downloaded PC wizard from http://www.cpuid.com/pcwizard.php and you know the T3400 shows up as the T5850, good lookin out Allfiredup! Went ahead and canceled the order for the QL and hit bestbuy for the Pentium and the first thing when we opened the box was load Windows 7 over the Vista Basic. It's only good till August, but it sure rocks compared to Vista! Even with the upgrade, you still have to reinstall the board drivers from Intel to make sure everything works right.

 

I was surprised that they went with Vista Home Basic on the 216dx (Intel) but Vista Home Premium on the 210us (AMD). The Intel configuration has a CPU, CPU and extra 1GB of RAM that would actually handle Vista Home Premium far better than the AMD setup? Then again, the Intel hardware will be even faster without all of VHP's "eye candy".

 

Update on this laptop and processor. My girlfriend loves her laptop but one odd issue is that it refuses to read usb SD readers. This is on the QL60-216DX. I've ordered several readers that work great on my laptop but on hers it gives an error.

From Win7 beta to RC occasionally the windows open would get blurry around the close and minimize controls but it all looks fixed in Win 7 RTM. This is a great Win 7 machine for the price.

 

an FYI , when AMD specifies a TDP Wattage, it means the total output of Heat, measured in Watts, at full load. so a processor that runs TDP 25 is certainly cooler and more power efficient then a processor that runs at TDP 35.

This results in longer runtimes but introduces other issues like capping the memspeed to 667.

It is basically the same principle as Undervolting.

 

i know it is a bit old thread , but this question still goes on, will this configuration of the mentioned processor and the hd 3200 be sufficient for everyday work and simple multimedia and office tasks maybe pdf things and minor scale movie editing, some engineering software like CAD and so on , i know everyone will say intel has superior performance , ok for this , but for average user will that difference will be noticed? and it is worthy to that old hp 6735b with all its accessories except webcam at around 300 euros or still go for intel?

 

You have to remember too with AMD cpu's the memory speed FSB is controlled from the CPU and therefore when running slower (Idle) will also slow the memory clock. If you run high performance and the cpu divisor alows the memory to run at it's max fsb then you are fine. If not you will notice memory bandwidth limitations.

With a 2.0 GHz and 667 memory you will run as CPU/6 for the FSB and 667 MHz but at 2.2 GHz you will run as CPU/8 and 550 MHz. Fastest ratio too is CPU/5 to bring the memory up to SPD rated FSB. Intel's memory FSB is constant so this isn't an issue........

Also AMD's memory controler is very picky with memory and command rate 1, most memory rests as command rate 2, especially in dual channel. This affects memory performance as well......

 

IMO , ur better off getting an intel laptop.... especially since ur considering old processor like this one which is really weak...

 

Why, if that really weak processor is all that's needed? That's like suggesting that someone buy a Ferrari just to drive down the block to the store...

 

+1
The QL will suffice for most application even low end gaming.
However I don't see the reason for buying a QL when M300/500/600 II processors are out they are much much better as good as C2D Clock for Clock.
QL is identical to ZM and RM except there is only 2 processor state (Full Clock & Half Clock) while ZM and RM have Quarter Clock Half Clock and Full Clock.