Turion 64 X2 vs Athlon 64 X2

Hi guys,

I've noticed that many laptop makers are using Athlon 64 X2 processor. Is it something new comparing to Turion 64 X2? Turion is more mobile or I'm mistaken?

Thx

 

The Turions are more mobile, better energy efficiency/battery life.

 

The Athlons are stripped down versions of the Turions at these speeds, notice that the Athlon l2 cache is half what the Turion would be.

 

The Athlons have 512K L2 cache while the Turions have 1MB L2 cache(except for the TL-50). The Athlons use slightly more power compared to the Turions but from what I have seen it doesnt seem to make much if not any difference. Basically it is just a cheaper Turion with half L2 cache and a different brand name.

 

I saw the comparison of these CPUs, but it seems that Athlon 64 X2 is faster.

I've got HP Pavilio dv6126eu with Turion 64 X2 TL-52 with 1 MB cache L2. Athlon's have half cache comparing to Turion, but they look faster according to notebookcheck.net.

 

The TL-52 runs at 1.6GHz. Any of the available Athlon X2's run at 1.7GHz+ so yes, in this particular case, it will be faster but compare to any similar clocked Turions it(the Athlon) will be slightly slower.

 

The turion on a laptop are better because they generate less heat.

 

Another difference between the 2 of them (other than power efficiency) is that the current athlon x2's do not support Virtualization while all turion x2's do.

 

Desktop Athlon 64 X2 had support for Virtualization technology, my Turion also is using it via BIOS option.

Wonder what voltage is using Athlon 64 X2 on notebooks.

 

Of course the processor speed is a vital factor, so, properly, you should compare systems of the same speed.

HOWEVER, if you buy a computer and you don't take into account the size of the level 2 cache (L2), you will definitely live to regret it. Years ago, Intel marketed Celeron 1.7s based on just that "1.7" figure alone. Suckers like me fell for it. These pieces of junk contained crippled-by-Intel 128-kb L2 caches, and so they compared very badly against computers with L2s of 256 or better, EVEN WHEN those other computers had slower processor speeds.

The L2 cache is like a data depot through which your system must pass millions of data transfers. If the L2 is weak, the system is weak. It is like working in an office surrounded by a perpetual traffic jam. Get the biggest L2 available for whatever systems you are comparing.

(And, by the way, that brilliant marketing strategy all those years ago by Intel was precisely what caused me to buy AMD last year and will again this year. And forever more.)

 

Yeah but AMD cpus that have an integrated memory controller don't rely on cache nearly as much as intels that don't have a IMC. So that's why your celeron felt like crap compared to other intel cpu. But in AMD cpus you won't notice a big difference from lack of l2 cache.

 

Also realize that a Celeron is a budget processor. You get what you pay for.

 

Turion 64X2 is Competitor to Intel C2D.... Athlon 64X2 is competitor to Intel Pentium M (M for mobile)

So Turion is definitely Better all the way...its the performance Chip While Athlon Mobile is Budget

 

What is a normal L2 cache size?

 

My Athlon 64 X2 is a dual core , all of the Athlon 64 X2 are dual core?

 

so which is better? the Turion x2 rm-72 at 2.1ghz or the athlon x2 QL-60 at 1.9ghz? im planning to get a new laptop and i have to choices..those are the difference of each unit..

 

rm-72 should be better especially for laptops and mobile computers. the ql-60 only supports 2 p-states and only downclocks to i think half the original speed (1ghz)

the rm series and zm series can downclock ukp to 500mhz when not used so power usage should be lower for those.

 

Yes. X2 = dual core.

You can't really blame intel when you didn't do your reasearch before buying Intel has never claimed that celeron is as fast as the other CPU's (didn't you ever think/wonder why they made cheaper celerons beside the normal cpu's?).
Celeron has always been stamped with "low budget".

I always buy what's best at the moment, it's just ignorant not to imho, why settle with something that isn't as good as it can be "today".