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.

    Intel Pentium M 1.6GHz vs. Core Solo SU3500, SuperPi and Wprime scores

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by Phil, Jul 13, 2009.

  1. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    Pentium M 1.6Ghz
    SuperPi 1M: 48 sec.
    Wprime 32M: 117 sec.

    Core Solo SU3500
    SuperPi 1M: 38 sec.
    Wprime 32M: 118 sec.

    So Pentium M is slower in SuperPI while it's faster in WPrime. Does anyone know why?
     
    Phil, Jul 13, 2009
    #1
  2. Tippey765

    Tippey765 Notebook Guru

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    Run the test again that 1 second seems meaningless to me about 1 second.
     
    Tippey765, Jul 13, 2009
    #2
  3. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    Well the 1 second is meaningless I agree. Still the difference in results surprised me. Going by SuperPi the SU3500 is stronger, in Wprime not.

    The reason I'm interested is for gauging how powerful the SU3500 is compared to my current CPU. Especially when it comes to Flash like Youtube HD.
     
    Phil, Jul 13, 2009
    #3
  4. NJoy

    NJoy Няшka

    Reputations:
    379
    Messages:
    857
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    31
    may be Wprime is a bit more frequency sensitive? Funny, but any other day I would have said this about SuperPi =)
     
    NJoy, Jul 13, 2009
    #4
  5. iGrim

    iGrim Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    47
    Messages:
    380
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Its because both wprime and superpi do not represent any real-world performance. They are simple integer benchmarks that offer no useful information about CPU performance.
     
    iGrim, Jul 13, 2009
    #5
  6. K-TRON

    K-TRON Hi, I'm Jimmy Diesel ^_^

    Reputations:
    4,412
    Messages:
    8,077
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Any reason why post #2 doesnt exist?
    It just goes from post 1 to post 3 for me

    These benchmarks are synthetic. If you want a real benchmark, use the processors to compress a file. You can time how long it takes and then you can see for yourself how much faster one is

    K-TRON
     
    K-TRON, Jul 13, 2009
    #6
  7. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    Guys I know those benchmarks are not a very good indicator of real world performance.

    Still my question remains, what causes the difference?
     
    Phil, Jul 14, 2009
    #7
  8. moral hazard

    moral hazard Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    2,779
    Messages:
    7,957
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    216
    doesn't the core solo have 3mb l2 cache while the pentium m has only 2mb?
     
    moral hazard, Jul 14, 2009
    #8
  9. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    That is correct.
     
    Phil, Jul 14, 2009
    #9
  10. moral hazard

    moral hazard Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    2,779
    Messages:
    7,957
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    216
    so could the difference in the scores be due to the cache?
     
    moral hazard, Jul 14, 2009
    #10
  11. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    Yes could be. Or it could be because of frequency like NJoy said.
     
    Phil, Jul 14, 2009
    #11
  12. davidkneiber

    davidkneiber Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    52
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    wow... and a penitum m doesnt score much higher than an atom processor on cpu charts???
    weird?
     
    davidkneiber, Jul 14, 2009
    #12
  13. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    Not sure what you're referring to but the Pentium M 1.6Ghz gets about 400 Passmark points while Atom N270 gets 260.

    In Passmark, Atom N270 is close to a 1.0 GHz Pentium M.
     
    Phil, Jul 14, 2009
    #13