Has AMD ever made a better mobile CPU than Intel?

I don't recall AMD ever making a mobile CPU that was better than an Intel Mobile CPU. It seems as though AMD is aiming towards the budget crowd.

 

I don't think so; while desktop chips usually go back and forth between the two makers, Intel seems to always have the mobile edge.

Of course most users won't notice the difference.

 

For a little while when there were only PMs and Turion64s, things were very even, with some benchmarks going to the Turions side.

But since the Core series, AMD has not been close.

 

yeah intels cpus much better

 

As mentioned, Mobile-wise, Intel has always had the lead. AMD was the rage in the past for desktops, but has since slipped alot.

 

The AMD Turion and the Pentium M were pretty close.

A few years ago in desktop replacement notebooks, the Athlon 64 was a far better CPU to have in a notebook than the Pentium 4. I remember that quite well because I had an Athlon 64-based notebook.

 

Exactly. Athlon64 was a far more viable desktop CPU to use in a notebook because of it's much lower power consumption and thermal load, at least compared to the equivalent Pentium IV.

Turion versus Pentium M were much more closely matched, and while Intel pipped AMD in most benchmarks, on a price/performance ratio the Turion was an extremely good deal.

 

Sure

because the turion was 64 bit it was superior to pentium m in some ways.

And I do believe in after the fact upgrades the top of the line turion is also faster than the old pentium m.

If I were buying a system today I would buy the turion 64 over the pentium m. They still sell turion 64 systems as new today.
This is from two angles because the turion x2 isnt really any better and the turion 64 was ahead of its time in its day.

 

how about the Athlon-M (barton core) that was out a few years back, just before the 64 bit athlons. Those were crazy fast for the time and had very good power consumption. What was awesome at the time was that you could pop one in any socket A motherboard that supported the stepping and it would overclock 20-30% on desktop voltages with very little heat penalty. specifically the Athlon 2500M was a monster. I had one speced to run 1800mhz at 333 fsb running 2200mhz at 400fsb.
Equivalent Intels were, well none. All the Celeron/Centrino stuff that was out was consuming too much power and making too much heat.

 

I think that Intel was always superiour in the mobile market. Turion64 bit wasn't as powerful as Intel Pentium M Sonoma. And the TurionX2 64 is much slower compared to the Core (2) Duo.

 

When the P4 and the Athlon64 were the only two choices for a performance mobile CPU, AMD easily held the crown, especially when you considered that the AMD machines would actually run on the battery for more than 45 minutes. Back when I had my m6805, my laptop was just about the fastest you could get without stepping up into the next price bracket.

 

Quoted for Truth.