what is the core 2 duo equivalent of TL-58?

would i be stretching it if i said that the intel T7100 (1.8ghz) was the core 2 duo equivalent of the amd TL-58 (1.9ghz) in terms of raw performance??

 

You could go even lower with the C2D to get the equivalent. My guess is maybe about a 1.5 would equal a 1.9 TL.

 

The AMD TL-58 (1.9ghz) is about as fast as a 1.4ghz Core 2 Duo and even then the 1.4ghz core 2 duo is still faster in some apps. We are a reseller of 22 different models of laptops all Turion X2, Core2duo, and core2duo based P.D.C here and have done extensive testing and CPU monitoring under various REAL apps.

Dont bother looking at synthectic benchmarks like wprime, or 2m pi, or others you see posted in these forums as they are laughably inaccurate as they are not real apps are dependent on clock freq.

 

ok, helpful stuff there onion. i guess that any core 2 duo would have been better anyways because of the low power consumption.

 

And how do you test? But I did actually get close with a guess?

You are correct, if buying a notebook unless the AMD offers more like RAM or many other things Intel does win on CPU. But remember the core duo and TL's are about the same in speed I do not know about Temp and power.

 

Yes. The Core 2 Duo is superior to the Turion X2 in every catagory. You name it, performance, power consumtion, heat, and even now price/performance.

Oh and by the way, there is no mobile AMD cpu that can match that 1.8ghz core 2 duo. AMD Turion x2 maxes out at 2.3ghz and is still slower than the 1.8ghz core2duo.

AMD CPUs operate at a FAR higher tep than core 2 duo also. This is becuase the Turion x2 is based on the DESKTOP Athlon 64 CPU and is unable to turn off L2 cache when not needed like the Core2Duo can. Because L2 cache is 60% of the Turion x2 CPU its a mojor issue and AMD can do nothing about it as it would require an entire architecture redesign which they dont have.

 

Its hard to tell you to go buy a core 2 duo laptop, because I am an AMD fanboy. I agree with Onion, a 1.4 will outperform a 1.9 turion. I truthfully believe that the turion line of processors are like the celeron versions of he pentium line. There is just very little power behind them. I wanted a fast AMD, and I found a notebook which had it, but I had to spend an ungodly amount for a chassis which could run an AMD server processor, which buy the way is only 2.86% slower than Intels E6700, but that is mainly because of the 60 mhz core difference and its faster FSB. Amd has the power in its opteron line, it just suffers in there desktop and mobile line. I mean when you compare a 2.6Ghz dual core Opteron 185 with a 2.66Ghz Core 2 Duo E6700, the difference is virtually negilable. I hat how people saw AMD's architecture sucks, when in reality its just as good as the core 2 duo line. Its just that AMDs server line matches and rivals intels mainstream core 2 duo line.

Sorry for the tangent, just get a decent core 2 dup laptop with a 1.6 or faster dual core, and a high density 160gb 5400rom drive or a 7200rpm drive and you will have a pretty sweet laptop.

K-TRON

 

One needs to understand also that AMD Turion x2 is running an architecture that is nearly 5 years old. Unfortunatly AMD STILL will be using this architecture in thier next laptop platfom as they dont have anything else...

 

I dont think the Turion line is five years old yet, but the point is that AMD turion processors are high spooling low torque processors. Once a load is applied their mflops cant handle it and they run slow as molasses. I believe the AMD turion line came out 3 years ago, but I may be wrong. I really hope AMD picks up the pace, they make a good product and have competitive prices, they just need to pick up the line with their athlon and turion processors.
K-TRON

 

Turion is simply Athlon 64 renamed for laptops. Same exact core architecture. Same for Turion X2 and Athlon X2.

Athlon 64 came out in 2003.

 

So how exactly do you test them? By cpu usage in the task manager?