Peformance different between Pentium M and Core Solo?

[Oooska]

Just curious--how much faster would a Core Solo processor at 1.66GHz be over a 1.6GHz Pentium M? Are we talking a noticable different, or is it negligable? Also, how does power consumption compare between the two?

 

[Sam Ontario]

Pentium M have Banias (1MB Cache) 1.6GHz and Dothan (2MB cache) 1.6GHz they are both running at 400FSB, Core Solo (2MB cache) 1.66GHz at 667FSB, depends on applications will run, I guess some 15% faster than Dothan and 20% faster than Banias. I have no proof of these figures. Maybe you go to search benchmarks done by someone else and average the results to achieve some sort of idea.

 

[xonik]

I'd imagine that Core Solo processors would perform identically to Core Duos, clock for clock, in single-threaded applications. That's a pretty significant jump over that of the Dothan Pentium M. Also, being a child of the 65 nm process means that power consumption should be lower than the Dothan too.

It may also be worthwhile to consider the Core Solo vs. Pentium M on a system level. The Core Solo would certainly be paired with an Intel 945GM or 945PM chipset, which supports a few features that the 855 or 915 series didn't. Examples include dual channel DDR2 memory support, an upgraded integrated graphics engine (supporting Vista, if the specs are correct), and an improved Intel 3945ABG wireless controller which has better auto-detection of the best wireless connection available.

 

[InternalStorm]

Well,

You guys have some stuff right and some stuff wrong.

The Dothan's come in both 400MHz FSB and 533MHz versions. The 7x5 are the 400FSB and the 7x0 are the 533FSB revisions.

Also, the 915 chipset DOES support Dual Channel DDR2.

Dothans are great performers, and a simple little wire mod and you can make the 7x5 400FSB into 533FSB... I turned my 1.6GHz 725 into a 2.13GHz

 

[xonik]

Yep, missed the dual channel detail in the 915 family feature list.