Intel Pentium, AMD, Intel M-Celeron?????

[MotoSook]

I've always avoided all but the Intel chip when shopping for a computer, but is there any reason to avoid an AMD chip or others anymore these days?

I'm looking at a computer that uses an AMD duo core 1.6MHz.

Is that preferable over a 1.2 MHz Intel Pentium in the same computer?

[sketchers356]

1.2 Mhz Pentium what? Also that AMD chip is 64 bit yes? I just got a machine with an AMD 64 X2 around that speed and I am very happy.

[BlueSkyJaunte]

The Pentium line is tapped out. Go with the Core 2 stuff.

[MotoSook]

I’m got a 1.3 GHZ Pentium M laptop for work right now, and it is fast enough. It is slow when I’m running multiple programs, but it has never been a problem. I hear the dual core stuff helps with the multiple program freezing and slowness I’m seeing now.

I’m between a ULV Intel Pentium M 733 (1.1 GHz) and an AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-50 (1.6 GHz) dual core.

Obviously the 1.6GHz is faster, but what about reliability and longevity of the AMD chip. Is the AMD chip going to last as long as an Intel chip? (I have an old IBM Pentium Laptop that is still kicking it after years of my abuse…) Also, I have never considered anything but an Intel chip for serious computing. I’m buying the laptop for personal use, but I’ll be running AutoCad and some scientific/engineering software on it. Will the AMD chip be up to it?

I know I can get faster and better computers, but they won’t be as portable as I need. Just what (if any) are the draw backs of the AMD chip? They’ve always been cheaper than the Intel chips and seemingly less reliable or robust. But is that still the case today?

[cashflyer]

I've had both in the past with no problems from any... but I am not a "power user".

The way it was explained to me, AMD always makes chips that are comparable to Intel in speed and performance. But I was told that there is a difference in how they handle instructions... like there is more than one way to plumb your house and still get the brown water to the sewer.

That is why some softwares say "AMD Optimized"... because they were written to take advantage of that chips instruction handling.

To really make your decision, look carefully at your software to discover if the manufacturers suggest one chip over the other. And also, I believe Microsoft writes all their stuff with Intel in mind.

Additionally, be aware that different tasks place different types of demands on the chip. This article is over a year old, but it shows many different parameters to consider.
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6389077-1.html


ymmv.

[MotoSook]

Better/more simple question:

What's the difference between an Intel Duo Core 1.6 GHz and an AMD duo Core 1/6 GHz chip?

[MotoSook]

cashflyer, that's kinda the stuff I'm after. I've never had an AMD chipped computer, so I don't know if the stuff I'm using will work the same on the AMD chipped computer.

[sketchers356]

To say that an AMD chip is less reliable or robust than a Intel chip is ridiculous. Things to note: AMD designed the X2 platform as a dual core chip as opposed to Intel who basically slapped two chips together all using the same FSB. Also note that the AMD FSB is 1000 MHz while most of the Intel chips are still 800 MHz. Also to note is that the AMD chip is 64 bit while the Intel chip that you are talking about I believe is a 32 bit one (I must admit I am having trouble figuring out which chips you want me to compare). If you have a 64 bit OS then the 64 bit processor will wipe the floor with a 32 bit chip.

[cashflyer]

Souk... with regard to your existing software, I don't think any software designed to work with one would refuse to work with the other, however you may find something that doesn't work as fast on one as it does on the other.

You posted while I was editing my last post to include a link. It won't give you a definitive answer, but will explain some of the different areas that get tested when making comparisons.

If you can put up with a lot of lingo, you may want to look over these two links:
Intel Core 2
AMD dual core
And this one explains what dual/multi core technology is, and also explains some of the advantages and disadvantages - such as software incompatability.LINK

In addition to operating system (OS) support, adjustments to existing software are required to maximize utilization of the computing resources provided by multi-core processors. Also, the ability of multi-core processors to increase application performance depends on the use of multiple threads within applications. For example, most current (2006) video games will run faster on a 3 GHz single-core processor than on a 2GHz dual-core processor (of the same core architecture), despite the dual-core theoretically having more processing power, because they are incapable of efficiently using more than one core at a time.

[id10t]

the price/performance ratio will almost always favor AMD. I've found an even better price/performance is 2 physical cpus of slightly slower speed - dual core is nice, but 2 physical cpus with 2 different memory paths, etc just rocks. Now dual dual-cores.... *drool*. My dual 1.2ghz AMD system "feels" just as fast as my single 3.2ghz Intel desktop at work, the dual P2-400 I had before that "felt" faster than a single 933mhz box I had at work.

[cashflyer]

Intel CORE is 32 bit, while CORE-2 is 64 bit.

If you're actually looking at a Pentium, stop now.
Intel officially considers it obsolete.

[MotoSook]

Alexander, my computer hardware and software ignorance is showing. I'm a mechanical engineer and have dabbled in computing enough to make me sound like a guy who's trying to sound like he knows something about computing....so bear with me.

I'm comparing this:

Processor and Core Logic
• AMD Turion™ 64 X2 TL-50 (1.6GHz)
Dual Core Mobile Processor
• 1600 MHz Full Duplex FSB (800 MHz
Double Clock Front Side Bus)
• nVIDIA® C51 MV North Bridge and
nVIDIA MPC51 South Bridge core
logic chipset


To this:
Processor
Processor Model Number T2300E
Data Bus Speed 667 MHz
Processor Manufacturer Intel
Processor Type Intel Core Duo
Chipset Type Mobile Intel 945GM Express
Processor Speed 1.66 GHz

There is a little cost difference with the two laptops, a Lenovo and an Averatec, but let's forget that in this thread.

I'm not saying the AMD chips of today are bad. I just don't know. That's why I'm asking.

If the AMD chip will give me years of trouble free use while running something like AutoCAD, then that's likely going to be the route I take. But if the AMD chip is mostly capable of running cool entertainment based software while compromising on the engineering/scientific software...then I go the Intel route.

[MotoSook]

To mix it up even more: I really want the featherlight laptop with this in it. It's an Averatec 1100.

• Intel® Pentium® M Processor Ultra Low Voltage 733 CPU
• 1.1GHz, 400 MHz Front Side Bus, 2MB L2 Cache

But, I can live with the slight bigger laptop containing on of the above two chips I posted above.

I'm starting to get it guys.

cash - thanks for the posts...things are starting to clear up for me. I've never used a duo core before, and never an AMD chip. I can live with things working a little differently with an AMD chip from how they may work with the Intel chips I'm use to. As long as it's not a major hassle and every feature of the software works with the AMD chip.

[cashflyer]

Given what you posted, I would take the AMD powered one.
That T2300E is the bottom line Core Duo, and is only 32 bit.

But there again, much like the issue with having dual cores or dual processors, what I'm told is that having 64 bits over 32 bits only becomes really noticeable when your software is designed to take advantage of the increased throughput.

[MotoSook]

Alright, so 64 bits is what I want. And if the AMD chip craps out on me, I'll toss it through Alexander's front door

Edit: DAMN! you had to go and edit youy post and make me thing again, cash!

[cashflyer]

Right... Alexanders. Not mine!!

EDIT: True, but are we not, as Porsche owners, supposed to be of the mindset that faster is always better? If it were me, I would take faster, even if my software was not optimised for it - because one day, I might buy some software that IS optimised for it.

[MotoSook]

Now tell me why an Expresscard slot is better or worst than a PCMCIA slot.

[cashflyer]

I can't help you on that question. I only buy desktops.

[Tim Hancock]

Souk, I have run Autocad 2000 on a 4 year old BestBuy middle of the road Compaq Presario 2100 that says it has a lowly Celeron chip in it. It works fine.

Some years ago, I was a bit more knowledgable about the latest computers and back then (386 and 486 days), I remember being advised that I needed a math co-processor chip and only basically the latest high-end stuff would handle Autocad etc. Back even before that, the company I worked for (mechanical engineering) paid something like $15,000 for a computer that would run some crude form of cad.

I do not think you will have a problem with either as far as Autocad or even Solidworks goes. My work computer that has Autocad and Solidworks on it is a 2 year old Dell and it was just a middle of the road computer when purchased.

[MotoSook]

Tim, your experience with using CAD on old computers and mention of "math co-processor" are likely the reasons for my reluctance to buy something that isn't Intel and w/o my own experience running CAD on. Talk about being stuck in techno time!

Well...I though I had found a low cost ultra-portable...until further internet searching turned up this guy's review I guess I'll wait for Averatec to work out the issues. I can wait until after the holidays when all price come down.

http://www.epinions.com/content_270450462340