compaq R3140US vs. CPQ R3120US

Hi,
i am deciding between these two machines. I will be running the usual office suite, SAP front-end and some heavy regression analysis. not much of games. Of cpurse, I plan to watch videos and play music possibly simultaneously with some apps running.

For this scenario, which machine do you think is better? Also, I am confused about this, which is a better processor - Athlon™ 64 or Athlon™XP-M for a mobile computer?

Another thing, I am checking out the prices, currently online, which store do you think will offer a good deal now (either online or offline)?

Hope they aren't 2 many Q's. !!!!!11 [ ]

tks a lot

 

The AMD64 is a much stronger processor.

zx5000 :: 2.4M :: 512 DDR :: 40gb 4200 RPM HD :: 15.4" :: Radeon 9600 Mobilty M10 :: Aquamark3 22,856

 

I have read somewhere that Athlon™XP-M is pretty crappy proc, but I have never checked this info. And it is not 64 bit one, so I think Mobile Athlon 64 may be better.

 

Athlon 64 is the latest and greatest from AMD, side with that.

 

well not exactly its the latest in the mobile world yes, but the FX series from AMD is newer, faster, better, and of course much more expensive.

zx5000 :: 2.4M :: 512 DDR :: 40gb 4200 RPM HD :: 15.4" :: Radeon 9600 Mobilty M10 :: Aquamark3 22,856

 

The Athlon XP-M is a good CPU, there's just no point in buying one when the Athlon 64 is not much more money. HP's marketing weasles insisted that they needed a 32-bit-only option so AMD built a Athlon XP-M that fits in the Athlon 64 socket just for them. I think they wanted something to sell to lusers who'd otherwise buy Celerons (bleah!).

You'll get a nice performence boost when 64-bit WinXP comes out late this year too. It sounds like you can make use of it. You might consider a build-to-order Compaq R3000z instead and select the Athlon 64 3400+, bigger battery, Bluetooth, better screen, etc. See hp.com.

For prebuilt machines, Best Buy pretty much owns. There's no-interest financing to abuse and sometimes they throw in a $150 rebate. See here:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=pcmcat22300050001&type=category&cmp=

 

BTW, (although there's been a thread with the same question) do you think it is worth upgrading to M6809 for $150?

The thing is that, actually, I do not quite need DVD-burner for movies. But I really need a processor as fast as I can get, I explained the reasons before - now I need to run simulations that may take upto 2-4 days on Intel 2.8GHz. Also I need to store a lot of data, so 80 GB is fine, but I guess there are two options: DVD-burner and keep data on DVD disks or buy an external HD + internal 80GB and keep data on this HD. I can not say which way is preferable. Seems, keeping data on DVDs are cheaper and safe, but I am not sure. That is where I stand. So, from my point of view, does it make sense investing extra $150 for that? I can spent this money, it is not a big deal for me. The question, is it really worth it? Like, is it possible that DVD-burner format becomes incompatible in the nearest future? Do I really have 3200/3000-factor faster computations or not?

 

For $150, sure, why not? The DVD burner handles both + and - formats, so you're set there. Using DVD-R for backups is a good idea, but you'll probably want to keep the data on a HD too for easy/fast access. The 3200+ CPU is about 10% faster than the 3000+ and it's the fastest Mobile (62W max) Athlon 64 currently out, so... yes, get it.

However... if your simulations can make use of a multiprocessor PC, you really ought to be thinking about a dual Opteron desktop. For simulations that would otherwise take 2-4 days it'd be worth it if you can spare the cash.

 

Actually, I do have a desktop. I want to run the program on both notebook and desktop. It is not difficult. Basically, what I am running is simulations for wireless encoder-decoder. To test probability of error upto 10^(-5) I have to run encoder-decoder 10^7-10^8 times. It often comes down to 1 day, but sometimes longer.

I was thinking about +HT processor, but I do not want to burn my notebook! Imagine, how much heat it is going to blow out - I won't have to pay for heating at home though. [ ]

As to DVDs, I was impressed with 4.7 GB per disk. Makes it a good storage.

 

Plus HT is as liable to hurt as help, especially when the threads are trying to perform identical tasks. It sounds like the Mobile 3200+ in the M6809 would be ideal for you, best balance of performence and power consumption.

 

The Athlon XP-M is an acceptable low end solution, and is at least twice as fast as any Celeron offering out there.

It is important to remember that the Athlon XP-M used in the R3120US is NOT the same as the rest of the XP-M line. Every other XP-M is based on the Barton core. The Athlon XP-M in the R3120 is based on the clawhammer core, the same as the AMD64 line. This chip is basically a stripped down version of the Athlon 64 chips found in the R3140US. It does not run the 64-bit architecture, and the L2 cache is only 256kb instead of the full 1mb.

This chip will run faster than any Celeron and lower end Pentium 4-M out there, but, for an extra $150, you should go with the full-blown Athlon 64 processor.

 

hi,

tks a lot for the replies. If I need any more clarifications, I will def. mail more.

again, tks a lot

 

one another thing - I hv been to AMD's website and still can't make out this - what exactly is the difference betn. 'mobile AMD Athlon™ 64 Processor' and a normal 'AMD Athlon™ 64 Processor'?

I know that a mobile AMD Athlon™ 64 Processor must be better for a notebook, but how much worse off is a notebook with AMD Athlon™ 64 Processor?

tks again,
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![?][?][?]

 

There are three classes of Athlon 64's for notebooks, the DTR (DeskTop Replacement) version (81W max), the Mobile version (62W max), and the Low-voltage version (35W max). Notebook makers don't always specify which one they're using clearly. HP uses the DTR version, eMachines uses the Mobile version, and Acer uses the LV version in their Ferarri 3200. It's nice to have the Mobile or LV version, but the Athlon 64 series is so power efficient that if you're just doing lightweight work none of the chips use very much power. It's only when you max out the chips that power consumption becomes a real issue. DTR's go up to 3400+, Mobiles up to 3200+, and LV's up to 2800+.

 

woo!.

so let me get this right? the chips perform more-or -less the same when I run apps like what i first mentioned 'the usual office suite, SAP front-end and some heavy regression analysis. I plan to watch videos and play music possibly simultaneously with some apps running'. so roughly 2-3 heavy-duty apps together.

But then, in such a case, a 3140 would consume more power. so does it mean it gets heated up a lot and is uncomfrtable to hold or has any performance deterioration?

(BTW, tks a lot for all the replies I got so far!!! )

 

The cooling system is pretty robust, with two fans, big heatsink and heatpipes, exhausts on the right hand side of my HP zv5000z which ought to be the same or similar to the Compaq R3000z/R31xx series. When you're plugged in, that exhaust can get pretty hot under sustained CPU load, but while unplugged it drops from 2GHz @ 1.5V (in the case of my 3200+ CPU) to 1.6GHz @ 1.3V, which cuts max power consumption almost in half, which results in exhaust that's only slightly warm. This is a much better compromise than Intel's SpeedStep that cuts CPU speed in half when you unplug. Remember, the AMD chips process more instructions per clock cycle than the Intel P4, so a 2GHz Athlon 64 3200+ roughly matches a 3.2GHz P4 (but the Athlon uses less power, cranking up clock speed like Intel does is inefficient).

You might want to get a built-to-order HP zv5000z or Compaq R3000z instead of a prebuilt machine, that way you can select the bigger 12 cell battery, Bluetooth, better screen, 3400+ CPU, single 512MB SODIMM instead of pair of 256MB's, etc.

 

I have found that, through experience with both systems, that the Compaq offering with the DTR Athlon 64 does heat up more than the mobile offering. Neither compares, however, to the heat generated by the P4's in notebooks, which is literally dangerous to keep on a lap for the amount of heat caused.

If weight is an issue, the mobile Athlon 64 will give a longer or equal battery life on a smaller, lighter batter.

 

As long as your just talking about P4 and not P4M which has no problems with heat, I frquently keep it on my lap for hours and have no problems.

zx5000 :: 2.4M :: 512 DDR :: 40gb 4200 RPM HD :: 15.4" :: Radeon 9600 Mobilty M10 :: Aquamark3 22,856

 

Personally, I am sorry to see Intel phasing out the P4Ms. They were good chips, and cheap performance is always a good thing. Dothans are a lot more expensive.

Yes, I was talking about the full P4s and EE's that they are putting in laptops.

 

Hi brianstretch,
well, I was having a look at eMachines M6805 as well. since i never bought / worked on a eMachines so far. how good is the M6805? and how does it compare to cpq r3140us.

tks again

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by xoom

 

hmm,one other thing, 3140 has JBL Pro Performance & M6805 has PC2001-compliant AC '97 audio. which do u think is better? frankly, i also haven't heard of emachines (new to the USA) and don't know how good they are?