Notebook CPUs

Anybody else feel that notebook processors are lagging behind their desktop counterparts? C2Q is the norm in the desktop world these days, yet C2Q laptops are still rare in anything other than a desktop replacement.

Nehalem doesn't seem to be improving the situation either... If anything, it's only getting worse given how the highest-clocked laptop i7 is slower than the lowest-clocked desktop i5.

I miss the Conroe/Merom days, where the desktop and laptop parts were nearly equal.

 

Why do you want more powerful CPUs in notebooks? The GPUs are still the bottlenecks.

 

Who doesn't want more powerful CPU's in notebooks?

 

^^ exactly

 

I agree but not everyone is playing 3D games in their laptops. The problem so far it seems to be the power they consume which is very high (both CPU and GPU). All the R&D teams are designing their products for the desktop (most of them are consuming 500W - 700W) and then try to apply the same technology to laptops (90W - 120W including the screen) by cutting down power. You can see the difference.
The Core 2 Duo on the other hand were designed from the Pentium M series (for laptops) which was really fast per GHz and very power efficient compared to the Pentium 4 HT series (for desktops). Pentium M series was designed specifically for laptops and differently to the desktops CPUs. I remember a Pentium M 1.7 GHz could be equal to a Pentium HT 3.0GHz in terms of gaming performance. Core CPUs and onwards chips are designed based on Pentium M so you can see that Intel will need to design a new chip in order to make the Quad cores more power efficient and compatible with laptops.
Maybe after the credit crunch period.

 

Both the Core and the Pentium M architecture have been pioneered from the old P6 Pentium III.

 

Desktops will probabally always stay a fair distance ahead as they dont need to take into account battery life, heat dissipation, size restrictions etc.

MUCH more power, space and thermal dissipation in those Boxes then in a laptop where components are shoehorned in there.

Trying to put my wifes 16 Core Desktop in a laptop chassis would be completly absured as the heat generated would possibly start fires. Its a major engineering challenge finding a balance between CPU, GPU, Battery and other factors in a footprint and design which the majority of people may find appealing

 

How long do you think it will be until they release substantially better notebook CPU's?

I'd prefer not to upgrade until something really great comes out that blows away C2D's and C2Q's.

 

I'm waiting for the final release of 32nm Westmere. That will blow the socks off my C2Q.

 

So basically we're back to the old Netburst-era Intel. Disappointing, considering how their low power without sacrificing performance approach is the best thing they've done this decade.

Isn't Nehalem also based on the P6? IIRC, Intel's not planning to fundamentally change the architecture until Haswell.

True, but the Pentium M/Core/Core 2 era greatly narrowed a gap that's now beginning to widen again.

It was only a few years ago that laptops had narrowed the gap enough to became suitable full-time replacements for desktops. I'm concerned that the trend will reverse itself in a few years time and comparing any laptop to a desktop will be like comparing an Atom-powered netbook to an i7-powered gaming desktop.

From the looks of it, not until Sandy Bridge at the soonest. I guess Arrandale would be an improvement over the C2D, but it's still fundamentally dual core.

 

I haven't seen the new mobile Nehalem's yet, so I wouldn't hold my breath on that. But I'll take your word for it.

 

Technically Nehalem is its own architecture - I'm merely assuming that it's descended from the P6 because virtually everything is, in some fashion. Except the Pentium 4/Pentium D, of course.