[adrian2055]

I had a HP-Compaq desktop (that died today) with these settings:

Intel Pentium 4 HT 2.8 Ghz Processor (Single Core)
2 Ghz DDR RAM (Can Go Up To 4GB)
Western Digital 160 GB Hard Drive (7200 RPM)
Lite-On DH20A4P 16X DVD-RW Drive
Intel® 82865G Graphics Controller (96MB Video Memory)
SoundMAX Integrated Digital Audio

and I just purchased an HP Pavilion laptop this week with these settings:

1.8 GHz AMD Turion64 Mobile ML-32 Processor
Seagate Momentus 80GB HardDrive (5400RPM)
512 MB DDR RAM (Can Go Up To 2GB)
PIONEER DVR-K16 8x DVD-RW Drive
ATI Mobility Radeon Xpress 200 Series (128 Dedicated, 256 Shared Video Memory)
Conexant AC-Link Audio Driver


What I'm wondering is why the AMD laptop seems to works so much better than the Intel Desktop (tried xp and vista on both). I would think the one with more memory and a better processor would work better. Now I don't know anything about AMD processors as this is my first pc with one. I've always thought Intel Processors were better than AMD and have avioded AMD for awhile. My games run smoother on the laptop and everything seems to work much faster than on the desktop even with less memory. Is there a reason for this?

This post has been edited by adrian2055: 20 December 2008 - 10:46 PM

[Sponsor]

[PC_LOAD_LETTER]

well in theory, the Intel CPU should outperform the AMD PC (not because of the brand because of the specs)
my guess as to why the 'slower' PC outperforms the 'faster' PC would be maybe the 'faster' PC had something wrong with it (it did fail)

[adrian2055]

The power supply went out on the intel.............or should I say It caught on fire when I tried to turn it on today. Good point. Maybe there was some more things wrong with it than I knew about. Ok, I'll stop thinking about this and just use the laptop.

[puntoMX]

Well, the onboard video is way better on the laptop. The CPU in your laptop for sure outperforms the ageing P4, so I´m not surprised there. I can´t say much about the hard disk drives but even there I would be not surprised if the 80GB 2.5" drives runs circles around the 160GB 3.5" drive.

I would throw in another GB in that laptop, it´s worth every penny...

[adrian2055]

puntoMX, on Dec 22 2008, 07:33 PM, said:

Well, the onboard video is way better on the laptop. The CPU in your laptop for sure outperforms the ageing P4, so I´m not surprised there. I can´t say much about the hard disk drives but even there I would be not surprised if the 80GB 2.5" drives runs circles around the 160GB 3.5" drive.

I would throw in another GB in that laptop, it´s worth every penny...

I plan on going up to 2GB of ram this week. I didn't realize that the AMD processor would outperform the P4, but it clearly has. I may stick with AMD from now on.

[CoffeeFiend]

adrian2055, on Dec 27 2008, 06:03 PM, said:

I didn't realize that the AMD processor would outperform the P4, but it clearly has. I may stick with AMD from now on.

It's not that AMD makes really fast chips (in fact, it's anything but the case right now). The thing is, P4's are pretty old & slow compared to today's CPUs. My old & discontinued CPU I bought for $70 over a year ago runs circles around the P4 3GHz it replaced (3x faster).

[Zenskas]

adrian2055, on Dec 28 2008, 10:03 AM, said:

I plan on going up to 2GB of ram this week. I didn't realize that the AMD processor would outperform the P4, but it clearly has. I may stick with AMD from now on.

No, no, no like crahak said just because the CPU in your laptop beats your old P4 doesn't mean AMD processors are faster than Intel. It is just that your laptop CPU is a lot newer and has more advanced technology.
The L2 cache on your AMD is 512KB (same as the Intel). The AMD FSB speed is 800Mhz (same as the Intel). Your AMD CPU supports technologies like MMX, Enhanced 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, PowerNow!, and NX Bit. Your Intel CPU only supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, and Hyper-Threading (which does not help performance much, if at all).
Also your AMD uses just 25W of power while the P4 used up to 69.7W. Oh yeah and the AMD is 90nm compared against 130nm on the P4 (90nm is smaller and newer than 130nm so the CPU can run even cooler and uses less power even if it was at the same clock speed)
And the laptop will slow down a bit in the future, as it gets as old as the P4 was when it died, because of the junk that computers collect to slow your system down.
The graphics in your laptop are better too which can help with things like playing games, watching movies, and the general quality of what is displayed on the screen.

Compare your CPU to mine, an Intel Core 2 Duo E7300, with 2.66Ghz clock speed, 3MB L2 cache, 1066Mhz FSB, 45nm, and technologies like MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology, Intel 64, XD bit, and iAMT2 all while using under 65W usually under 55W.

So keep your options open. In fact currently Intel CPUs are the fastest(core i7) and the best all rounders (core 2 duo e7/8xxx series).

Anyway, an upgrade to 2GB of RAM will be welcomed by your laptop and should keep it going strong later on down the track when it is fully loaded with all the stuff you put on it.

This post has been edited by RiderZen: 29 December 2008 - 12:28 AM

[puntoMX]

RiderZen, on Dec 29 2008, 12:10 AM, said:

... and the best all rounders (core 2 duo e7/8xxx series).

Only when you overclock, at stock speeds an low/mid range AMD is still a good pick...