??? about CPU speeds- AMD vs. Intel

R

rage4order

Gawd
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
795
Can anyone tell me what the relative comparison between AMD processor speeds and Intel Pentium speeds are? Not sure if I'm asking this the right way but for example, an AMD 64 3000+ @ 2Ghz=Intel Pentium @ ??? Ghz? Reason I ask is I see Intel advertising their HT technology and 3Ghz on some laptops, while the fastest I've seen an AMD lappy is around 2 GHz. Basically, I'm trying to figure out the effective comparable speeds between the two. Hope you understand exactly what I'm trying to ask. Am I even making sense??? :confused:
 
AMD chips generally do more work per cycle than Intel chips, so just using the clock rate to compare them isn't a good idea. AMD's retarded naming scheme doesn't help anything and just further confuses people. And there are other factors like cache size, SSE, SSE2, SEE3, etc that effect performance.

The best thing to do is to look up some benchmarks that compare the CPUs so you can see which one is better for the applications you intend to run.
 
Yeah, I tell you, with Intel's Hyperthreading, and AMD's Hypertransport, it's hard for me to figure out the comparisons. I may be in the market for a laptop, probably by the end of the year and would like to get some kind of idea on what I'm getting into, whether it be Intel or AMD. I do have an AMD 64 3000+ in my PC and am really loving it. Main reason I'm trying to figure this out is because of the $$$. It just seems like you get a good comparable AMD at a lower price than an Intel.
BTW, where's a good benchmark site?
 
as far as IPC is concerned (instructions per clock, effectiveness of mhz)

Pentium-M > AMD64 > Pentium 4

1.8ghz (745) | 3500+ | 3.2ghz (540) = comparable clock speeds

(i dont know how accurate this is because i have never used a pentium-m or amd, but from general knowledge of benchmarks i have seen, it seems about right)

If you cold get a Pentium-M based laptop, you would see very nice performance and very little heat and power consumption.

I would say Pentium-M is the best choice for a laptop processor at the moment
 
shoes said:
as far as IPC is concerned (instructions per clock, effectiveness of mhz)

Pentium-M > AMD64 > Pentium 4

1.8ghz (745) | 3500+ | 3.2ghz (540) = comparable clock speeds

(i dont know how accurate this is because i have never used a pentium-m or amd, but from general knowledge of benchmarks i have seen, it seems about right)

If you cold get a Pentium-M based laptop, you would see very nice performance and very little heat and power consumption.

I would say Pentium-M is the best choice for a laptop processor at the moment
Click to expand...
Great! Thanks for that little info. I was kind of thinking with Intel, the "effective" clock rate is pretty much half of what they list because of their HT technology. Kind of like your comparison above. I know that's a pretty generalized statement, but I was trying to get a baseline on what Intel chips matchup with what AMD chips.
I'm really leaning to an AMD 64 lappy but if I could get a good deal on an Intel, I'd get one instead. I just wanted some way to compare the two.
 
Yeah for a good lappy the P-M(Sonoma) is really the best way to go...

If you are looking for a good deal check out the Mobile Computing Forum there is a huge thread about the Inspirion 9300, which I own one myself. :D
 
UltimaParadox said:
Yeah for a good lappy the P-M(Sonoma) is really the best way to go...

If you are looking for a good deal check out the Mobile Computing Forum there is a huge thread about the Inspirion 9300, which I own one myself. :D
Click to expand...
Will do. Thanks.
 
Intels effective clock speed isnt really half of what they say it is just because of HT. Hyper threading basically takes one physical processor, and makes the computer see it as 2. Boosting performance in some tasks. However, just because you may or may not have HT enabled or even if you do utilizing it to its full potential doesnt make the clock really half of what it is. Thats like saying a dual processor macine with two 2 Ghz processors really runs at an equavilent (sp) of 4 ghz. Doesnt work that way.
 
Thanks for all the help and links. I'll have to do some reading up now ;) . Still a bit confused but all your answers have helped a lot. I'm sure reading some of those benchmark sites will help more too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top