Turion X2 vs. Core Duo (32-bit)

In a recent thread I noticed that the PC Mark 05 score on the MS-1057 (core duo 1.8ghz) was slightly higher then the MS-1058 (turion x2 1.6ghz). I would have expected the turion x2 to perform at least as well as the slightly higher clocked core duo, but that wasn't the case.

I was wondering if anyone has run benchmarks comparing these two processors (with the same clock speeds)? From what I've seen so far, for 32-bit applications, it may not even be worthwhile to upgrade to a turion X2 (or even a merom) from a core duo.

 

So far their arent any specs on the X2's, so its not certain or not if the X2 is going to act like the older Turions. If you need dual core right now with 32bit capability, go with the core duo's. If you want to be future proof and have 64bit capability and also faster processing times, then go for the Merom and the X2.

 

The whole "future proof" thing is a huge crock of ****. They've been saying that ever since the Athlon 64's came out a few years ago and still today no reason really for 64-bit (l have nothing against amd, l love them. Just pointing out how long 64-bit has been around).


Well actually IBM had the first 64-bit chip but l'm only talking about consumer chips

 

Unless you run Linux that is. Linux has had AMD64 distros for years. 64-bit WinXP was ignored by too many peripherals makers but Vista should force the issue.

At any rate, Turion X2 notebooks are (likely) a few weeks away and should run significantly cooler than Core Duos, plus have better shared-memory GPUs if you're into thin-and-lights (ATI and nVidia vs. Intel GMA series). I'd wait.

 

Yeah, Well I'm pretyy sure that M$ and Intel have some pretty good deal in regards to the release date of Vista.
I'm willing to bet a fair bit on Vista being released just in time for Merom and Conroe!

Besides, isnt there going to be a 32-bit version of vista anyway?

64bit XP didnt wow me on my current turion 64.

Insane

 

Well, the Turion X2s have officially launched today. I didn't see any reviews yet, but I'm eagerly awaiting them.

I wouldn't say at this point that the Turion X2s will be significantly cooler than the Core Duos. After all the TDP for the Yonah is 31W and for the Turion X2, 35W. I have no clue how they measure their TDPs or if they're measured the same way, but I wouldn't say the Turion X2's going to be 'significantly' cooler by any long shot.

 

Nice thing about these new AMDx2 chips is they are cheaper and should offer similar performance to intel and for at least a quarter they will be 64bit while intel catches up..not that it matters to much

 

Yeah the mt line of turion is on par with the pM (seems a little better in real world apps IMHO). I dont know how serious this 64bit stuff will get in the next few months to a year, but at least I have the ability to run those apps.

 

So, ignoring the 64-bit v. 32-bit issue for now (which shouldn't be an issue for most people due to lack of software), I think we can conclude the following:

(better processor in bold)

Price:
Turion X2 v. Core Duo
Performance:
Turion X2 v. Core Duo (similar)
Power Consumption:
Turion X2 v. Core Duo (unclear at this point)
Upgradability:
Turion X2 v. Core Duo (unclear)

So, if it turns out that the X2 consumes less power than the core duo, the Turion X2 is the clear winner, otherwise it's a toss up.

 

the review was against the lower-cache TL-50, the TL-52 actually marks higher than a comparable core duo.

Those are all pre-release specs, though, so we won't know for sure til they actually get a good release test.