AMD Turion 64 or Intel Core Duo HELP!!

AH. I'm so lost at the moment. I've recently bought an HP laptop with an AMD Turion 64 processor and, personally, I don't know if it'll be as satisfactory to me. I don't really have much experience in understanding the whole processor thing, I just know that the Intel Core Duo has 2 32-bit processors while the Turion has one 64-bit one. On top of that, I don't really comprehend how this and the processor speed are jointed and which one has a larger affect on the speed and "well-being", I guess, of the computer.

I rather don't understand which one will let my computer run faster and smoother and which one will be more durable for the future [considering I've just boughten a laptop]. I plan on keeping the laptop without buying a new one for a while considering that.

Thanks for taking the time out to read through this and help.

 

64 bit vs 32 bit really doesnt have anything to do with running things faster, especially 32 bit programs. One of the main advantages to a 64 bit processor is that it allows the system to theoretically be able to use alot more Ram than a 32 bit processor can take advantage of. But most laptops cant have more than 2 gigs or 4 gigs of ram anyway so that point is irrelivant. In Addition, until programs are written in 64 bit code, there really isnt any advantage to having a 64 bit processor at this time.

The Core 2 Duo (Conroe for desktop and Merom for laptop) stomp the hell out of anything AMD has right now (they just happen to be 64 bit also). Since the laptop version of the chip comes out in August, I would wait on a laptop purchase.

EXCEPTION TO WAITING would be the fact that if you have a new Centrino Duo laptop, in most cases the new Core 2 Duo chip will work on those systems so when they come out, you can just swap out your Core Duo (or Centrino Duo as its otherwise known) 32 bit chip with your new Core 2 Duo 64 bit chip.

AMD vs INTEL:

AMD used to have an edge because their chip architecture was superior to that of Intels (not neccesarily having anything to do with the 64 bit thing). This has changed now.

The Core Duos and Core 2 Duos are alot more efficient than than the old intel P4s and faster than the AMDs.

Also, do to better chip design, saying what "Ghz" a chip is doesnt really tell you much these days. You gota just look at the benchmarks to see whats better than what.

So if you want the best CPU performance, go with Core Duo or Core 2 Duo and drop AMD like a smelly turd until we see if AMD can take back the performance title with their quad core chips.

 

Right now the Core Duo is the best notebook CPU.

 

Ok. So then go with the Toshiba Intel Centrino Duo?

Would you mind explaining to me what the processor speed really does compared with the processor?

So, in other words, would getting an Intel Centrino Duo with a 1.6 GHz speed have more of an advantage or would an AMD Turion 64 with a 1.8 GHz speed have more of an advantage?

Thanks for the help. :]

 

Centrino Duo.

You can only compare speed within the same family. I.e. a 2.0 Turion will be faster than a 1.8 Turion, but both might be slower than a 1.6 Core Duo.

The best analogy I can think of would be fan speeds - Take CPU fans -

If I have a 60mm fan at 5500 RPM it will cool better than a 60mm fan at 3500 RPM, but if I run a 120mm fan, it might cool better at 1500 RPM than the 60mm at 5500.

With processors, it is number of instructions per cycle, so if one processor can run 8x more instructions per cycle, it will be 8x as fast at the same clock speed.

 

Which one is better for battery life? Also which one (I know one is better?) to lessen the heat factor? Thanks

 

well I had the one of the fastest turions on the market and it worked very well. But I have just ordered a core duo 1.66ghz lappy...so that should tell you something...

Just for the record the turion is no slouch, but it now seems like an unwise decision when I could have gone dual core for very little more money.

 

Core Duo has both better performance and battery life.

 

Ah, I feel so.... "dooped" for lack of better words.

4 of the comp technicians at Circuit City told me that the AMD Turion 64 [because they speculations everyday] was better in general. So, me, with lack of time (because I am leaving for another country in 5 days and I still have a bunch of other things to get sorted) bought an HP dv5000 and ... I don't know, but I'm not happy with what I've sorted out already. It doesn't really have the capability (from what I've tested) to multitask. It divides up the tasks by slowing down all of them. I mean, it's like 5x slower than this Dell desktop.... which, reluctantly saying, is not the fastest thing.

Added onto, it just, in general, is slow. I mean, with this crappy cable connection, my desktop can go 20 kb/s on downloads while the laptop only seems to be able to go 4, at max 5.
Heh.

I'm losing my mind at the moment. I really don't know what I should do. Also, the Centrino Duo one that I planned on getting was the last model and it sold out right before I could get it.

I need urgent help.

 

If your average usage involves lots of multitasking, then a Core Duo is a must. Benchmarks and clockspeeds aside, a dual core 32 bit CPU is going to "feel" more responsive than a single core 64 bit CPU any day of the week.

I believe the dv5000 is also available with a Core Duo. If you're otherwise happy with the specs, appearance and build quality of your current notebook I'd look into that.

 

They do. But again, I do not have much time and I don't think they sell it in the store. On top of that, I believe it costs about 300 bucks more. :/ I mean, does it make such a large noticable difference?

[Added onto, it just, in general, is slow. I mean, with this crappy cable connection, my desktop can go 20 kb/s on downloads while the laptop only seems to be able to go 4, at max 5.]

They also have a fee for returning it.... (15%) and I can't afford to pay that just because I've tested it myself.

 

That might have more to do with the wireless card than the Turion.

Maybe it depends on your frame of reference, I've been pretty impressed with the Turion, but I agree with others that the Duo is faster, especially for multi-tasking.

You might try disabling or uninstalling unnecessary stuff that loads at startup and disabling unneeded WinXP services. You should do this with any computer, but it might get you to acceptable performance.

Also, if you download the benchmark comparisons between the Core Duo and the Turion - go back to CC and show them those results (from several sites) and explain that you bought the computer based on four of their salespeople's statements and are dis-satisfied with the performance and feel mislead, they might take it back and waive the 15% fee.

Start with the guy on the floor, then talk to the manager. If that fails start dropping hints about the forums here and at FatWallet, the governor's office of consumer affairs, the BBB, etc. As necessary, start talking loud so other customers hear what you have to say, but be careful to only state facts so you can't be accused of slander or threatening demeanor.

Even if it doesn't work, you'll feel better.

 

Just saw this part. DV5000t or DV5000z are the same base price from www.shopping.hp.com. They do typically only carry the Turions at CC and charge more for the Duo's (in other brands). They also charge more for HP on the web, plus it won't fit with your time frame. (I would expect the Duo to be about $150 more instead of $300, all else being comparable).

As far as a noticeable difference, as I said, I've been impressed with the Turion, but I don't multi-task much or have a hyper-threading desktop PC, so it's hard to compare.

 

Haha. That's a good idea.

Yeah, I'm disabling and uninstalling all of the unnecessary items.
Would you mind giving me links to sites with benchmarks.

Oh, on top of that, I went to the "Geek Squad" to ask a bit about the AMD Turion 64 vs. the Intel Centrino Duo and they even tell me that a "stronger" bet would be to go with the Turion 64. This is aside from the whole "salesperson" perspective from Circuit City. Eh.

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=49674

Don't have any others, but as was stated elsewhere if you do a Google search on "Turion 64 vs. Core Duo" http://www.google.com/search?hs=Nid...a&rls=en&q=Turion+64+vs.+Core+Duo&btnG=Search (Try it in the other order as well) - you don't find direct comparisons, but note that the first link is a Pentium M 760 vs. a Turion ML-44, and the next to the last one is "Core Duo vs. Turion 64 X-2"

There is this article - http://crave.cnet.co.uk/laptops/0,39029450,49273534,00.htm - but the user comments imply that the Intel system had an extra 1G of RAM to make it better than the Turion X-2.

Still if we know the slowest Core Duo is faster than the fastest Pentium M and Core Duo is being benchmarked against Turion X-2 and Pentium M is being benchmarked against Turion, well . . .

Well, not necessarily untrue, look at this quote from the C-net article:

A few quotes from Rahul Sood, President and CTO of Voodoo PC about AMD64 vs Intel 1) "From a technical standpoint the Turion 64 is more advanced than the Pentium M simply because it’s available in 25 watt versions with true 64 bit integration. The Turion 64 is faster than the Pentium M, and it is Windows Vista ready, and it currently supports other 64 bit operating systems. The Turion 64 could be better though, much better." 2) "Intel Core Duo is essentially a 32 bit Pentium M with dual cores. Current AMD Turion 64 parts are 64 bit low voltage with single cores. What this means to you is Turion 64 is truly Windows Vista ready – as Vista is slated to be a 64 bit OS. While dual core technology is great, 32 bit dual core is not that exciting." 3) "I hope this article makes sense, I could go on all day but I don't have the time. The morale of the story is you should “go long on Turion 64” as it has a very promising future." The Link: http://voo...

OTOH, the cynic in me says that they are pushing the Turion b/c they have more laptops with that processor, they are less expensive (so easier to sell) and likely have higher profit margins for them, rather than a concern for the end-user's computing needs.

 

So what's faster, athlon 64 x2 4400 (2 2.2 ghz cores) or t2600 which is, I think, 2.16 ghz?

 

athlon x2 on laptop or desktop?
x2 on laptop(clevo) doesn't perform like x2 on desktop. Laptop x2 4600 is about desktop x2 4200.
Athlon X2 4400 on desktop and t2600 performs about the same.

 

PCWorld recently had a preview of the Turion X2 vs. Dual Core, and the Turion was consistently slower (not by a ton though) then the Dual Core. The Dual Core 2 should open the gap even wider.

Desktop= AMD, Notebook= Intel

 

my 4400 is laptop

 

the 4600 is only 512 x2 though, when my 4400 is 1mb x2

 

Heh. Well, I guess it's too late to go through with the returning now, isn't it?

 

Why??? --->(But Why??? I mean seriously why???)<--- Drivel inside parentheses added to make reply more than 10 characters long