Intel Core i5-430M vs. AMD Phenom II N930

I'm looking into buying a laptop (HP dv6-se) and was curious how these processors compare. Why would you pick one over the other? Any opinions?

 

To be honest the new mobile AMD phenoms are pretty much a joke atm(performance like a core 2 duo if not less)... Get the intel core i5....

 

In benchmarks, the N930 is scoring higher than the Core i5-430M. I just wanted to know how this translated into real life use, and why to choose one over the other (quad core vs dual core).

 

It depends on what you're planning to do. You won't notice any difference if you're not running any CPU intensive applications.

 

Why AMD?It has less experience in notebook market,and it overheats,uses to much power,AMD CPU's are defective in notebooks.Intel all the way in notebook market,do not even bother AMD.

 

A bit of references wouldn't be bad. I've never heard such claims, not that I have paid attention.

Back to the topic:
If the performance is better on the Phenom CPU then the only remaining question is the price difference between both processors. Obviously if the price is the same then get the Phenom.

Back in 2007 in the cusp of Intel's C2D and the AMD counterpart I found the price/performance (not price/clock) of both mobile components were very similar. Today in the laptop market it seems Intel is the ruling CPU maker.

 

Notebook makers that use them must be idiots then?

 

Most people way over estimate the CPU needs. If you're just going on the internet or typing up a word document, a Pentium M will do. The historical issue with AMDs is they run hotter and have less battery life. If these new CPUs can fix those two issues and come in at a price point that's less than Intel, things will start to become more interesting.

 

The N930 is going to perform slightly ahead of the i5-430M, about on par with the i5-520/540M.

As for heat and power my guess is that they will be similar as well. I have a dv6z with the Phenom II N620 (35TDP, same as N930) and I am getting around 4.25 hours of battery life under normal use and my max temp is 66C while others with dv6t have reported around 3.75 hours of battery life and max temps in the mid/high 70s. Not a huge sample size but still worth something. The N930 configuration is also $30 cheaper than the 430M.

And, for the record, Intel's high end C2D (P/T9xxx), perform about the same or sometimes better than the core i's as well.

 

do you work for Intel?

 

What are your CPU needs? In single and dual threaded performance (what most laptops get used for), the Core i5 will absolutely annihilate the N930 -- there is no contest there at all. In heavily threaded tasks (4 or more threads), the N930 will have a slight advantage. Which one you should get depends on what you intend to use the laptop for.

 

I agree with everyone above: we need a better portrait of your computer uses and intended tasks. Maybe both of these are overkill or maybe both of these are underpowered depending on your uses.

 

Well what I'd be using it for ranges from web browsing, listening to music and watching movies, word processing, the rare case of image editing, anything that I might need to do for my major (computer engineering), as well as some light gaming here and there (mostly rts games ie: Age of Empires 3).

 

Of course not,but I strongly beleive that Intel is better on the notebook market,I have not seen an Intel Processor overheating like AMD processors.AMD has a far way to go,but Intel already finished traveling.

There are no problems in Intel.It is like a Volvo.It might be expensive and sometimes not worth to pick,but it is safe and you can trust it.

 

No mate,They are not idiots,but they would not care to put a AMD processor since,the consumers will buy it anyway,many consumers in the world are not even know AMD has issuess,so it would not matter a lot.

A student that was in our class this year,had an toshiba A300 with Amd Turion X2,and it was idling at 95C.The Notebook was not dusty,and it was also running hot since the day it was bought.

I am only Recommanding Intel,I wouldnt care to write this if a question,a help was not asked.I am not a Intel or AMD fan either,I just buy the one that is better.I dont care about the brand and name.

 

Actually its not fair to compare AMD's High end quad core with intel's medium range dual.. it would be more accurate to compare it to i5-520m.. anyways , i would get a core i5-520m at least.. IMO , AMD's so called quad core is not much better than an old dual core intel.

 

I would look into a i5-520M, but I cannot seem to find something I like in the ~$800 price range with one.

 

That may have been true with past AMD processors but they seem to have it fixed the overheating problem in the newer Turion and Phenom II's, from the few reviews that we have seen.

 

try sony vaio e series for one... but seriously , it will be 900ish range.. if u can find a dell or hp , using coupon codes u can bring price down a lot and maybe get a quad i7..

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834127206
Newegg.com - TOSHIBA Satellite A665-S6058 NoteBook Intel Core i5 450M(2.40GHz) 16" 4GB Memory 500GB HDD 5400rpm DVD Super Multi NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M

They are not i5 520m but they are closer in your price range and will offer well more then enough performance to play the games you want

 

Intel notebooks have a better track record as of late, but I wouldn't blindly choose them... take a look at the processors:

Phenom N930: ~2600 passmark score, 35W TDP
i5-430m: ~2300 passmark score, 35W TDP
i7-720Qm: ~3200 passmark score, 45W TDP

The Phenom is CERTAINLY competitive. It has a performance level somewhere between the i5 and i7, for a cheaper price I'm sure...

Now, from a thermal perspective, it can be approximated that it's comparable to the i5 (same TDP), probably a little hotter due the higher frequency, and more physical cores...although that is almost never a 100% accurate comparison..also, I know AMD has been working to lower the waste heat generated from their CPUs.

Info from: PassMark Software - CPU Benchmarks - List of Benchmarked CPUs and Notebookcheck: AMD Phenom II X4 N930 Notebook Processor for TDPs

There are no "problems" with AMDs either. Its not AMD's fault if there CPUs are less expensive and therefore get thrown into crappy notebooks with inadequate cooling...

Everybody remember...there once was a time when AMD reigned supreme, and any gamer who know his stuff had an Athlon...

 

toshiba doesnt stand a chance when compared to HP in build quality, especially their cheaper models.

 

The N930 has a 35W TDP, classic

Notebookcheck: AMD Phenom II X4 N930 Notebook Processor

 

Wow, edited my post. Good catch...makes the AMD even more attractive.

 

http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/11/17/reliability.study.has.apple.4th.place/

In short, you're wrong.

Way to post random conjecture...

see bar graph:

 

Build quality is not exactly the same thing as reliability. I think that what njoy was saying is that the current offerings from HP are built much stronger than those of Toshiba. I can't say that I disagree with him either. I have owned a dm4 and currently own a dv6 and the build quality is amazingly sturdy. Even the g62t I played with at BB seemed better put together than the A660 they had on display, and the G-series is HP's budget line while the A660 is Toshiba's premium mainstream notebook.

 

There's no official definition for build quality, but most people (as far as I can see by google) consider it to be the quality of the unit if all hardware specs match (ie: 1 lappy vs another with the same HDD size, CPU, GPU etc). This would include physical, thermal, and reliability measures.

 

I can see your point but even if that is true then njoy's statement still fits. When you compare HP's current line-up to that of Toshiba there is no comparison. Just because there is some study that shows HP's previous problems doesn't mean that it is true today. The validity of that study has also already been discussed at length but some of the arguments against it are obvious,

1. By and large, the people that buy a warranty from Square Trade are less than knowledgeable, who will hereafter be known as n00bs to save time. These n00bs don't practice proper computer care which could lead to the problems.

2. The larger manufacturers, including the two largest (HP and Acer/Gateway), are at a distinct disadvantage because just the fact that they represent more of market means they will have more n00bs buying their product. This again leads to improper care and more "defective" products.

3. 2006, when that study was started, was when HP was going through the Nvidia fiasco where a lot of the fault lied with Nvidia, though HP had its share of the blame as well. HP has since responded by switching almost completely to ATI and designing better cooling systems on top of that.

 

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you! I was about to defend my position, but you've said everything already. Rep for that

....dam it, can't rep u coz u were the last person I repped...

 

I hate to bump this up but as I now have an N930 in my hands I thought that I might as well let people know how it performs.

3dMark06 CPU Score: 2799 (slightly ahead of i5-520 and behind i5-540M

Cinebench R10 (multi): 7525 (i7-620M level)

Passmark Performance Test v7: 2543 (higher than any i5)

Heat: 66C max after running IntelBurn Test three times and 3dMark06 once

 

those are low but how are the temps after gaming? Might be greay if u can post some pics of CPUID hardware monitor after playing some games.

 

I'm not home right now, on vacation in St. Augustine for a couple more days, and the only games I have on Steam are older games that aren't going to stress it much. When I get home I'll do that but I don't think the temps are going to be higher than that.

 

Nice! I'm thrilled to hear this. These are great scores and I love to see competitive AMD products.

As for the HP stats. I'm a computer tech...and the mass quantities of defective HPs I see, combined with the low quality parts they use has soiled their reputation for me. I don't mean to insult anybody with an HP, the new Envy line is yet untested, so we can have faith...I'm a pessimist though...

Me and my wife were in St. Augustine for a part of our honeymoon...beautiful.

 

I would definately get the Intel Core i5-430M. Great choice!

 

I will take N930 over i5-430m or 520m anytime of the day. =D

 

These are some great news, abaddon!

It's kind of a pointless argument since all of them are made by the same ODMs anyway. I still think HP models get better materials and are designed better, it's not only for the name you pay premium. And last but not least, you can't beat HP's customer service

 

Decided to stay down through the weekend so those gaming temps are gonna have to wait but here are the temps after running 3dMark06 twice, Cinebench R10 three times, Passmark's performance test, playing KOTOR at max settings for an hour or so, and then running IntelBurn Test five times with an ambient temperature of 77F (25C). I think that this is as hot as they are going to get.



The only parts of the notebook that are warm are the left palm rest, slightly, and the back left by the vent. The entire right side stays very cool and the bottom isn't even warm, except by the vent. I have been trying to run PCMark 05/Vantage and 3dMark Vantage as well but the trial key page at Futuremark is failing to load every time.

 

Wow those temps are very nice.

 

i am very nicely surprised

 

those temps are better than my DV5t temps.. well at least hp has improved its cooling and design...

 

Since you ran 3DMark06 what was the total score. My interest here is that usually the i5's use the GMA unless you are spending the money for an integrated GPU solution. Since AMD doesn't have the set limit to the integrated GPU it may also be stronger gaming performer in economy systems.

 

With the 5650 enabled I get ~7300 and with the integrated card (4250) I get ~2100.

 

I just bought a HP dv6 with all the same hardware as abaddon4180 except the hard drive. I think mine is 5400 RPM, but still gets a 5.9 in windows experience index, so I could be wrong. I had a toshiba with the i7 for two days and took it back. Not sure if it was all the bloat ware Toshiba puts on its system or that it would freeze up when cold, but the AMD HP laptop has a faster boot time and just feels faster in general. The construction feels better too. The toshiba just felt flimsy. The aluminum shell hides fingerprints well. I am digging the biometric finger print feature too.

I did about an hour of gaming, playing Battlefield Bad Company 2 on high settings and max resolution last night. I used core temp to see how hot the processor was getting. Maxed out at 67C on a well ventilated surface. The game played smooth as well. This is my first laptop and I have to say I am impressed. I wanted to go intel, but there weren't many in my price range that had the specs I wanted. I needed something midsized with a dedicated graphics card. i3s and i5s with dedicated graphics were in short supply where I shopped.

 

Nice to see some other impressions. I felt like I was the only one who owned one.

 

No. You are not alone. I would actually recommend getting one. It really is a solid machine. This processor is in-between an i5 and i7 in performance. AMD and Intel are really not that far apart. I understand we all have our preferences of manufacturers, but don't assume because of past problems things are going to be the same. This is coming from an Intel fan too.

 

i seriously doubt its near i7.. its near i5 but seriously i7.. nah.. anyways if i was on a budget , i would get this.. but i'm not but good to know that for once hp did burn out an AMD or intel notebook.

 

In heavily threaded tasks it is about as good as the i7-620M.

 

I think sean473 was thinking about the quad core i7, not the dual core i7-620M.

 

Well that means AMD more or less equaled their mobile CPUs to their desktop ones; their desktop Phenom II quads can play against i5s but not against the higher end i7s so it's pretty mirrored now.

 

What about multithreaded performance comparison?
I'd like to know how this AMD cpu stacks up against the i7 qm since it does have 2 extra cores in contrast to the i5.