TL-58 vs C2D T5250

I've read about the the differences between C2D vs Turion X2 with the Intel topping AMD in most/all cases. But those are with identical clockspeeds. I'm looking at two HPs that are almost identical in features except processors and cost.

The DV6646US has a 1.9GHz Turion 64 X2 Mobile TL-58 and the DX6650US comes with a 1.5GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Mobile T5250 for about $200.00 more. Is the C2D, with a slower clock speed, worth the extra $200.00 for a budget laptop?

 

i definitely don't think it is worth $200. go for the turion.

 

No in budget laptops it is not worth $200 more for intel over AMD. IF you where spending $2000 that would be different.

 

Besides, the TL-58 will be faster for most uses than the T5250, in raw computing power it's 10-15% faster.

 

What are the other specs? That's an awful lot, even for the Intel Marketing Tax(R). Perhaps the dx6550 has dedicated graphics, or some added fluff features (webcam, mic, fingerprint reader)?

 

I agree with lowly here, theres something else going on here. List the other model you are considering please.

 

The C2D has a 200GB 5400RPM rather than a 160GB 5400RPM
So go for the DV6646US, less HDD but cheaper and a tiny bit faster CPU.

Got the specs from here
DV6646US: http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/HP-P...91730/catOid/-12963/rpem/ccd/productDetail.do
DX6650US: http://www.compusabusiness.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=347664

 

Go with the AMD!

 

I agree, go with the AMD system.

 

Thanks for the replies. Sure makes it easy when it's so one sided on the advice. I'll be picking up the AMD version tomorrow thanks to all of your input. I'm guessing this advice will help others too.

Just wondering, if the cost was even would the AMD still be the way to go?

Also, thanks for the comparison on the HD. Had no access to a computer for awhile there.

There's also a diff on the graphics.

AMD: NVIDIA GeForce GO 7150M
Up to 559MB of shared video memory

Intel: Intel GMA X3100
Up to 384MB shared video memory

It doesn't seem like either stand out over the other.

 

Because of driver support, the 7150m is currently ahead of the x3100 in performance, so theirs another tally for the AMD one .

If cost was even, it would really depend on your needs. For light gaming and things like photoshop, the AMD machine would definitely be the way to go. But if your usage was just light apps, web browsing, office, etc., then the Intel would be much more attractive, probably running slightly cooler with slightly better battery life, with a significantly larger and noticeably faster hard drive. However, none of those advantages are worth $200, especially when paired with an overall less powerful system.

 

A few days ago I really had no need to look for a laptop since the last laptop I had to buy in 1995:

Compaq Contura 400C 5.9 lbs
486DX/2 SL Enhanced 40-MHz
4 MB built-in memory
250 MB hard drive
1.44 MB floppy drive
8.4 inch Active Matrix Color VGA
Local Bus Graphics
Integrated Center Mount Trackball
MS-DOS 6 and Windows 3.11
$2300.00

So I had no idea what to look for and how to sort out all the choices.

But a couple of days of research and I was able to discern what I wanted largely due to this site and people like all of you.

You have my thanks!

Merry Christmas!

 

Got any benchmarks running Crysis on that laptop? LOL

 

Wow. I just paid $200 MORE for the Intel 1.5 Duo Core 2.. You guys are saying the 1.9GHz Turion 64 X2 Mobile is FASTER?? Thanks!

 

Yes, if C2D T5250 1.5GHz vs AMD TL-58 1.9GHz, the AMD will be faster.
Not a lot, but not a little.

 

Yup, in raw power, probably 10-15% faster. However the Intel has other advantages, such as a little better battery life and cooler operating temperatures.

 

It really doesn't matter which CPU you get . . . I doubt you could tell the difference between them. Only in synthetic benchmarks will you see a numbered difference between them. Both processors are more than adequate for general tasks.

That said, get the laptop that has the best combination of features.

 

That's if you were comparing the two HP's I was contemplating. I don't know if Toshiba has the same pricing markup on their C2D over AMD's and two models that were close to each other in features as the HP's are.

 

I know it couldn't run the original Myst. Anyway, I had my Amiga 3000 for games back then.

 

lol the power of 486! Awesome!

 

I would like to point out that the TL-58 actually uses less power then the T5250. TL-58 was designed for 31 watts while T5250 was designed for 35. This would give the AMD system about 15 or so minutes more life from a 6 cell 4A (standard) battery, assuming that all the other components use the same power on both systems.

I have an HP pv2615nr. It runs a TL-58 when it's not plugged into an outlet, the HP settings bring it down to 800Mhz or 1600Mhz, depending on what you are doing. The system stays stable and doesn't slow down a great deal when doing daily things (ie. word editing, checking e mail). I'm glad I didn't get the Intel system.

P.S. I'm not an Intel hater, this is my first AMD.

 

Actually, the TL-58 does indeed use more power on idle than the T5250, despite the designed consumptions.

 

We have already discussed that there is no reason to by Turion x2 based noebook.

Turion x2 uses more power and is slower than the Core2Duo 1.5ghz. The reason Turions x2s us so much power is becuase they can NOT turn off thier L2 cache memory which is basically 60% of the CPU chip. Core 2Duos CAN turn L2 cache on and off hence they are FAR superior in power efficency.,

Even at idle Turion x2 runs very warm while the Core2Duo is ice cold.

The Core2Duo 1.5 ghz uses very VERY little power as its not clocked high yet its still FASTER that the Turion x2 1.9ghz.

Stay away from AMD based units.

I like AMD in the desktop segment but for laptops thier current x2 product is FAR inferior.

 

I don't think your right. http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=107265

 

We know that Onion has very strong opinions in the Intel vs. AMD mobile cpu. Point is, he's not really correct, but makes it sound that way.

My brother has upgraded to a TL-58 from a Sempron in his Acer and it idles at 31*-32*C, so you're above quote is complete BS and biased.

 

One needs to understand that my knowledge and experience is far superior to 99% of others in this forum.

We have here well over 22 different current model laptops which contain Core2Duos and AMD Turion X2.

ALL the AMD Turion X2 model ALWAYS have much higher CPU usage compared to lower clocked C2D and overall in my EXPERT experience a Core2Duo 1.5ghz is still a hair faster than a 1.9ghz Turion X2. No question about it.

Whether you believe it or not it’s still a FACT. YES, I know it hurts for someone to hear this.

The fact of the matter is at idle the Turion x2 consumes ALOOOOOT more power than C2D and this is a MAJOR problem with turionx2 as it was designed based on the desktop athlon64 architecture that is 4 years old. Again, Can’t turn off L2 cache on the Turionx2 when not needed which is 60% of the CPU. Does not take a brain surgeon to understand that this type of design consumes a lot of power at idle as you have to power all those transistors when you don’t even need them. They are sitting there sucking power and doing NOTHING.

 

What one "thinks" is irrelevent and the thread you linked to is pretty much a joke.

 

While your technical statements are correct, you are wrong to say tell novice users on this forum to "stay away from AMD based units." This is really crappy advice

Yes, AMD X2s consume more power and perform more poorly, but AMD-based laptops offer far superior price points, which are their prime selling point. For 4-5W differences in power consumption you can pay anywhere from $50-$200 more for the Core 2 Duo at the store.

Additionally you are comparing two different generation CPUs; what you are doing is the equivalent of comparing a car to a horse-drawn wagon. The Turion X2 was designed to compete with the Core Duo (which it does very well; it idles 1-2W more and costs much less), not the Core 2 Duo.

Keep in mind that there are people besides you who are perhaps on a budget and seeking good advice, not narrow-minded views such as the one you have presented.

 

Which one is better is really irrelevant when you take into account the difference in price. Even if the Core 2 Duo were "better" than the Turion the $200 price difference does not make the Core 2 Duo the best value for money, even if it does consume less power. For $200 you could buy a larger battery and have some change.

 

Thats all fine BUT I believe Intel is now starting to produce the "Pentium Dual Core" based off Core2Duo like the T2310. Which is great news for budget laptops and BAD news for AMD as AMD has little to offer even in there upcoming new platform which isnt even out yet.

I would highly recommend buying a c2d based "pentium Dual core" laptop instead of AMD based if you're on a budget.

 

First of all, onion, a TL-58 has more raw power and is faster in CPU bound activities than the T5250. That is a fact, confirmed by every CPU benchmarking program in existence (3dmark06, SuperPi, WPrime, etc.) Secondly, the "Pentium Dual Core" brand name CPU's are still more expensive than comparable AMD budget processors when found in budget OEM machines, as the intel mobos cost more the vast majority of the time.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbbSj_azkWw
Sorry for being a bit off topic. But I just had to. It's just so funny video.

 

Cut this crap please!

 

onion has received sufficient infraction points to warrant a temporary ban. Perhaps he will learn his lesson in that time. In the mean time, back to our regularly scheduled topic...

The AMD platform does have a very good price advantage at the lower end. In this case, for example, the winner is clear. And the Pentium Dual-Core is markedly slower than the Core 2 Duo, clock-per-clock, as it lacks 75% of the Core 2 7xxx series' massive cache that gives them such a leg up in synthetic benchmarks. They also (to my knowledge) lack the deepest sleep state of the Core 2.

 

Priceless. Thank you.

 

I'm baaaAAAck....

 

Glad to have you back, welcome! But maybe you should back off what gets you banned? AMD are a value CPU and are very good for those in that market. Chaz said it very well and so have many other's so it is what it is. If I found a notebook for a good price w/AMD I would buy in a minute!

 

thread closed. question has been answered.