AMD Turion 64 x2 processors---heat problems?

I read several threads in which owners of HP notebooks with AMD Turion 64 x2 processors talked about those processors creating more heat than comparable Intel processors.

Have any of you found this to be the case? I am within a few days of ordering a dv6275us at CompUSA ([ http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=343931&pfp=feb11&tabtype=pi#moreinfo] for $1299.99 after $150 instant savings and $50 MIR), but I keep looking at the offerings with AMD processors at a little lower price.

So, would you save a little money and go with the AMD? I don't do gaming, so I either processor will do well what I need.

Thanks.

 

It's true that the Intels run cooler, (i believe they use lower wattage?). However, mine never get to the point were its unbearable even after being on my lap for a couple hours. But on NBR, the consensus seems to be for mobility, Intel is the way to go.

 

I've sat my dv9000z-series laptop on my lap for hours at a time. It doesn't get hot. Battery life will be better with Intel but due to the chipset more than the CPU, and that advantage will be mostly negated if you selected a dedicated memory video card. If you don't need the extra battery time buy AMD.

 

Here are the thermal specs for the Turion X2's and the Intel Core2 Duo's.

I would like to point out that the way that Intel and AMD rate their TDP's (thermal design power) is quite different. Intel measures it by taking using the average maximum power usage that can be attained during heavy use while AMD uses the maximum theoretical power usage based on the number of transistors and their resistances. Thus, AMD's TDP's are actually a bit lower than they spec them to be

AMD
TL-60 -- 35W -- 2.0 GHz
TL-56 -- 33W -- 1.8 GHz
TL-52 -- 31W -- 1.6 GHz
TL-50 -- 31W -- 1.6 GHz

Intel
T7600 -- 34W -- 2.33 GHz
T7400 -- 34W -- 2.16 GHz
T7200 -- 34W -- 2.00 GHz
T5600 -- 34W -- 1.83 GHz
T5500 -- 34W -- 1.66 GHz

With this information you can clearly see that the Intel CPU's are not using less power than their AMD counterparts.

There are two likely reasons that the AMD based systems have shorter battery life and/or run hotter.

1. The chipset. Its possible the chipsets that are paired with AMD systems consume more power than those of the Intel based systems.

2. The power management of the Intel processor is better and is able to use less power while at idle compared to the AMD's. If anyone has concreete data on power usage of both the Intel and AMD CPU's while at idle and 25% load I would love to see it


brianstretch: dedicated video cards more than negate any power advantage a system would have. I have seen an dell system that ran for 6 hours on battery with the integrated video, but with a 7800 mobile, the battery life went to under 2 hours. Granted, the 7400 Go is much less power hungry than the 7800Go, but you get the point.

Lastly: I would like to point out that the temperature that the system runs at should NOT be defined as the same as power usage. There are a number of factors that determine how hot a system will run, only one of which is its thermal output.

 

Thanks for the information, but I was thinking about "real world" usage. I have read consumer reviews and posts from folks who have an AMD Turion 2x and when annoying heat from the computer is mentioned, it is usually made by those who own machines powered by the AMD Turion instead of the Intel.

Please understand that I have nothing for or against either company. My present 4-year-old notebook has an AMD Athlon XP 1900+ and I've had no heat issues. I would just like to make certain my next one doesn't, either.

Bill

 

Got an X2 in my DV2000. Doesn't unbearably hot at all. There has never been a time when I've had to do something because of the laptop being too hot,.

My friends Dell with a Core 2 Duo on the other hand, whether that's just the design of the notebook, the under parts get verrry hot.

 

Honestly, i didnt notice any heat problems with the DV6000Z i had. I only had it for a day, but in that one day i beat the living crap out of it. I put it through some MAJOR stuff. all sorts of benchmarking. heavy duty programs etc. I did this because i wanted to see how it performed as a modern notebook compared to its intel counterpart so i would get an idea which one to keep.

It failed miserably compared to the intel version. But i can say i didnt notice ANY heat problems what so ever.

The only thin i DID like was that it had no whine at all.......*sigh*


TL-56 btw