which one has better performance?

[tempest]

which one has better performance, AMD Athlon 64 X2 QL-60/1.9GHz or Intel
Core 2 Duo T5670/1.80GHz?

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/e...295-321838-89315-3687779-3687795-3756343.html
vs
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/e...295-321838-89315-3687778-3687786-3867839.html

 

[SC Tom]

which one has better performance, AMD Athlon 64 X2 QL-60/1.9GHz or Intel
Core 2 Duo T5670/1.80GHz?

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/e...295-321838-89315-3687779-3687795-3756343.html
vs
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/e...295-321838-89315-3687778-3687786-3867839.html

The cheaper one ;-)

Years ago (back in the original Pentium and pre-Pentium days), I was a
die-hard Intel fan. After the PII came out, and the AMD K7 Slot A followed
it, the PII cost almost twice as much. Since I was going to need a new MB no
matter which CPU I bought, I decided to give the AMD a shot. I never
regretted that choice- it ran everything at home as well as my work PC with
the PII ran stuff at work. I have been running AMD's ever since, even in the
notebooks I had (except my latest one, a Gateway M6850-FX with the Intel
Centrino Duo Mobile Technology Intel CoreT 2 Duo processor T5550 1.83GHz
CPU. The only reason I got it was because of the dedicated video card.). My
home PC has an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ running @ 2.5GHz. My guess is that
with the newer CPU's (since the PIII's, anyhow), it would be hard to tell
the difference in performance without a good benchmark program. As far as
the average user is concerned, I don't think that equally equipped systems
would have any discernable difference in performance.

Just my humble opinion. . .
SC Tom

 

[tempest]

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/e...295-321838-89315-3687778-3687786-3867839.html

The cheaper one ;-)

Years ago (back in the original Pentium and pre-Pentium days), I was a
die-hard Intel fan. After the PII came out, and the AMD K7 Slot A followed
it, the PII cost almost twice as much. Since I was going to need a new MB no
matter which CPU I bought, I decided to give the AMD a shot. I never
regretted that choice- it ran everything at home as well as my work PC with
the PII ran stuff at work. I have been running AMD's ever since, even in the
notebooks I had (except my latest one, a Gateway M6850-FX with the Intel
Centrino Duo Mobile Technology Intel CoreT 2 Duo processor T5550 1.83GHz
CPU. The only reason I got it was because of the dedicated video card.). My
home PC has an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ running @ 2.5GHz. My guess is that
with the newer CPU's (since the PIII's, anyhow), it would be hard to tell
the difference in performance without a good benchmark program. As far as
the average user is concerned, I don't think that equally equipped systems
would have any discernable difference in performance.

Just my humble opinion. . .
SC Tom

 

[SC Tom]

The HP Pavilion w/ AMD that I had didn't throw out near as much heat as my
Gateway does, but it didn't have a dedicated video card either. But the
older Compaq w/ Intel in it was about the same as the HP w/ AMD, so I'd say,
no, they probably produce about the same amount of heat. Do a google search
on the specs for each one to find out for sure.

SC Tom

 

[DL]

You would need to review the watts for each cpu
I have spec sheets for Desktop CPU's but not mobile cpus
eg Core 2 duo desktop cpu's in the E series put out 65W
the AMD equivelent puts out up to 95W

 

[Paul]

You would need to review the watts for each cpu
I have spec sheets for Desktop CPU's but not mobile cpus
eg Core 2 duo desktop cpu's in the E series put out 65W
the AMD equivelent puts out up to 95W

The processors are both 35W.

http://products.amd.com/en-us/NotebookCPUDetail.aspx?id=437 "QL-60"
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLAJ5 "T5670"

You can also check the rated battery life, battery size,
adapter size, for some hints about power. And one of the
notebook review sites may have more practical numbers
than the ones in the advert.

Paul