TL-xx vs T5xx

Is it safe to assume that at similar processor speeds, the TL-series matches up with the T5xx (or even T7xx)?
Say, for example, a TL-56 vs T5550 .. who rules the road?
If the two had similar cache size, which one would be "better"?

 

Don't mix apples and oranges. Totaly different design, AMD not as cache dependent. Intel needs more.
Clock for Clock TL beats all except Core2Duo, CoreDuo almost same as TL. Don't look at number look at which line of Intels.

 

Well for multitasking I would say the Intel wins, but for Single-tasking (if thats even a word) AMD is not far behind, and it can compete with the T5xxx series.

It would not make a difference if the Turion had a 2mb cache, because the memory controller is on the processor, having a larger cache not a priority, whereas Intel's memory controller goes through the front side bus (Anyone? Am i correct on this?) Making cache a larger priority.

@baddog: It is possible to compare them, but comparing clock for clock, is like mixing "apples and oranges", because of their complete different architecture, I would say a TL-64 is actually competitive towards the T7100 / High T5xxx series.

 

How so?.....

 

I remember reading it somewhere, someone should know a bit more then I do, maybe then can correct me or confirm my statement, then we will see. As, this is what I remember reading, so I have no proof, because the place escapes my head.

 

Clock speed is totally arbitrary at this point, I don't even bother looking.

 

I would like someone who knows to comment, if true it would be nice to know.

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/02/27/dual_core_notebook_cpus_explored/page11.html

This is for the older CPU's, the Napa Merom's and the Trinidad Turion X2s, I believe the newer versions give an all around performance increase on both sides. I do not believe that there is a significant difference in the AMD vs Intel debate (at least the mobile processors one) when looking at multithreaded benchmarks vs singlethreaded benchmarks.

 

Thanks for the link, Tom's usually good source. This case when I picked two CPU's always put the fastest Intel up as one of the choices. But my main question was regarding the statement “Well for multitasking I would say the Intel wins, but for Single-tasking (if thats even a word) AMD is not far behind” these benchmarks did not address that unless I missed it.

 

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_mobile.html

i would say a TL-60 is better than a T5470
at same clocks a core 2 duo don't perform that much better than a core duo

 

Look at the Cinebench-1 CPU test which is singlethreaded and then look at an extremely multithreaded test like Adobe Photoshop, that's where you can see the difference.

 

Thanks for the link Odin! Ah, must have been Tom's as you can tell though, the Turion isn't as horrible as most people make it seem. . .

 

yeah, but looking at those comparison charts on Tom's, it seems that the TL-52 and TL-56 aren't even close to a T5xx processor.
so, AMD is simply facing the heat from core 2 duo.

 

In quite a few of the benchmarks, they fall exactly where they should in terms of clock speeds. I.E. the 1800mhz TL falls right below the 1833mhz Core Duo, and the 1600mhz TL actually beats the budget 1666mhz Core Duo.

 

from what i saw on toms, the TL-56 is slightly worse than the T2300 which performs on par with a T5500 or T5600. So a TL-60 should be at least equal to T5500 or T5600 in performance.