The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    AMD Turion 64 and Intel Pentium M Comparison

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by Reize, Mar 20, 2006.

  1. Reize

    Reize Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    347
    Messages:
    2,652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    After looking around one and off for an hour or so I just thought I'd post my question here for a probably much faster and more accurate answer.

    I was curious as to how the AMD Turion 64 and the Intel Pentium M compare, not the power or battery life or all that, just a comparison list like the one in lowlymarine's Laptop FAQ that compares the Pentium M to the Pentium 4 Gigahertz for Gigahertz.

    Thanks in advance.
     
    Reize, Mar 20, 2006
    #1
  2. miner

    miner Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    1,326
    Messages:
    7,137
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    205
    More or less the Turion64 and the Pentium M are equivalent based on their clock speed. In some benchmarks the Pentium M wins in some others the Turions perform better. In all fairness I would tend to put the Pentium M slightly ahead of a equivalent clocked Turion but the Pentium M is not substantially faster.
    This review should give a clear picture...
    http://www.laptoplogic.com/resources/detail.php?id=17

    The newer Core Duo and the Core Solo's have moved the performance post a bit farther and we have got to see how the Turion X2 and the DDR2 supported Turions do compared to the competition when they are released.
     
    miner, Mar 21, 2006
    #2
  3. Reize

    Reize Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    347
    Messages:
    2,652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Thank you very much miner, I really appreciate you clearing this up for me. ^_^
     
    Reize, Mar 21, 2006
    #3
  4. Charles P. Jefferies

    Charles P. Jefferies Lead Moderator Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    22,339
    Messages:
    36,639
    Likes Received:
    5,080
    Trophy Points:
    931
    My last laptop had a Turion ML-30 1.6GHz in it - my current has a 1.86GHz Pentium M. Although the Turion was slower in clockspeed, it did feel noticably 'snappier' in general performance. I'd go for a Turion, my $.02.

    Chaz
     
    Charles P. Jefferies, Mar 21, 2006
    #4
  5. Reize

    Reize Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    347
    Messages:
    2,652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    I'm most likely buying a computer with a Turion 64 CPU, well, a Sempron to start with and upgrading it later.

    I was just curious as to how they compared in power, I was fairly sure the Turion was a bit more powerful, maybe I'm just biased about AMD that way, and that the Pentium M was liked because it was also very powerful but offered great power usage and was cooler.
     
    Reize, Mar 21, 2006
    #5
  6. tullnd

    tullnd Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    83
    Messages:
    446
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Frankly...right now they're pretty much on par. I'd just worry about the other features you want for your price range, and buy what's available with the video card/hard drive/optical drive combo you want, at whatever processor speed you need. If it's Turion, fine. If it's Pentium M/Core Solo, fine.
     
    tullnd, Mar 21, 2006
    #6
  7. philibuster

    philibuster Notebook Geek

    Reputations:
    10
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    pentium Ms use less power than the turions. With a laptop, you've got to compare battery life too. Make sure you compare the number of battery cells too. Runtime/number of cells is a good comparison. But usually the runtimes are grossly inflated.
     
    philibuster, Mar 21, 2006
    #7