CNET's 1st report on AMD Turion 64 X2

"The early results on AMD's dual-core Turion 64 X2 mobile processor are not encouraging, neither in terms of performance nor power management. Our first Turion 64 X2-based laptop, the HP Compaq nx6325, just finished up in the CNET Labs, and we thought we'd share the results here ahead of the review. With a Turion 64 X2 TL-56 processor running at 1.8GHz, the HP Compaq nx6325 produced an overall SysMark 2004 score of 155, which trails by a healthy 17 to 18 percent the scores from similarly outfitted systems, such as the Panasonic ToughBook 74 and the Compaq Presario V3000, that use a 1.8GHz Intel Core Duo chip."

"......but the nx6325 doesn't offer much more in terms of battery life"

Here's a link to the entire report:


http://www.computershopper.com/Networking/4835-10921_7-6546613.html

 

maybe i should've gone w/ the core duo.. oh well too late now

 

Cisbrane, you'd better wait for some more reviews. I always take Cnet's reviews with a pinch of salt. A big pinch in fact.

 

I agree. I've read reviews where they've reviewed to nearly identical products, and raved about one, then ripped the other (different reviewers, but it still makes you wonder!)

Not sure how reliable their testing is, however. I've found flaws in their subjective reviews, can't say I've found errors in their testing, but perhaps others have.

 

That, and HP didn't help matters by configuring DDR2-533 RAM. TX2's need at least DDR2-667. From the dv6000 series link posted earlier today it looks like they may be correcting that problem.

I'm also highly skeptical of the BAPco synthetic benchmarks. BAPco used to be headquartered in an Intel building.

 

CNET reviews are not credible for me... just my two cents

 

I agree that you can't really trust CNET -

But I do think it's fairly well-established that the Core Duo is more than just marginally superior in performance to the Turion X2, aside from the fact that the X2 is 64-bit. To tell you the truth, I see all this interest in the X2 and I can't help but wonder why - for those of you who think you'll need 64-bit in a year or two, you should be able to drop in a 64-bit Core 2 Duo, which will be even more powerful and efficient.

 

Guys, I do see a positive point. Look at the battery life, nx6325 produce 226 mins. That means 3:45 hr performance. It is understandable to have 30 mins less than core duo, but it is really a big improve compare to Turion.

They didn't say anything about updating new CPU driver to save more energy, neither dual core optimizing. Just take their review as base line.

 

i thought that the Core 2 Duo was not a PURE 64bit processor..?

i know the amd turion is a real 64bit w/ a 32bit mode, but i thought that the intel just has like extensions or somethin....

 

I understand that the Core 2 Duo is supposed to be 64 bit when it comes out but for me I'd rather buy a 64 bit now and not have to buy a Core Duo processor now and then have to buy another processor to "drop in" when it comes. That would mean having to shell out another few hundred bucks when I could save money now by getting 64 bit now.

 

Take a look at the service manual for your notebook and see all the work that's involved to "drop in" a new CPU. HP makes you practically disassemble the entire notebook. 99% of the population isn't going to attempt that. You're also assuming that HP is going to provide the required BIOS upgrade and that there won't be any other surprises.

Reviews of desktop Socket AM2 Athlon 64's have shown huge performance improvements when faster RAM is used. HP's recent decision to start switching over to DDR2-667 in at least some of their TX2 models pretty much confirms how much the higher grade RAM is needed.

 

I hope this will be true for DV2000z and V3000z.

 

HP thinking to get away cheaper by selling the AMD systems w/ 533 RAM. AMD probably got a hold of the situation, just a few phone calls...

 

Could someone translate the RAM language to the fledgling computer ilk? ;] I just ordered the dv2000z with the 64 x2 (TL 52) with 1.0 GB DDR2 SDRAM (2x 512MB), am I in the clear on this?

 

HP got the message and switched to the faster 667 DDR2 SDRAM. No big deal either way really. You are in the clear!

 

sweet, sucks for X2 owners, but good news for everyone who decided to go cure duo instead!

 

Erh, I'll wait untill Tom's or Anand review it, thank you very much...

 

The article actually says "With a Turion 64 X2 TL-56 processor running at 1.8GHz, the HP Compaq nx6325 produced an overall SysMark 2004 score of 155, which trails by a healthy 17 to 18 percent the scores from similarly outfitted systems, such as the Panasonic ToughBook 74 and the Compaq Presario V3000, that use a 1.8GHz Intel Core Duo chip"

For those deciding between the two flavors of dv2000's or v3000's, the difference would be even greater. The AMD currently offered isn't the 1.83 Ghz, but the 1.6, compared to faster versions of the Intel Duo Core's.

I don't think other reviews will necessarily suddenly find that the AMD 1.6 is as fast as an Intel Duo Core 1.66, 1.83 or 2.0..... on other systems, I guess the results could be different.

 

I'm not saying their numbers are wrong. I ám saying that I find them perfectly capable of running one CPU in battery optimized and the other in always on or something like that.

Besides, it's always a good idea to verify with anothes source.

 

Now that some reviews of the v3000z and dv2000z are appearing, how is the battery life of the AMD Turion 64 X2 Mobile TL-52 compared to the Intel Duo Core's?

The speed of the AMD seems to be lacking, when compared to the Intel. Not sure by how much, though.

 

the only thing good about cnet is their video reviews (for the video part, not the review part)

other than that...my grandmother can review better than cnet.

 

I agree! Though the reviewers really look geeky at most times!