Slashdot Mirror
More Analysis Of Pentium M Desktops
Hack Jandy writes "The Pentium 4 has gotten enough attention lately as a slow, over heated monstrosity; but does Intel's Pentium M fare any better? Intel's decision to introduce the Pentium M as a desktop processor (East Fork) may not be all it's cracked up to be. Sudhian has an in-depth article, and Anand has benchmarks (on Linux!). I will stick with my Athlon 64, thank you very much."
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=dot hangaming&page=1
and it shows how differently it performs compared to things like compiling a kernel in linux. According to the review, it competes almost as fast or sometimes as fast as the A64 in some games.
It's still an impressive cpu and better than tha bacon-cooker (prescott).
That the Pentium-M isn't optimised at all for what they were benchmarking (apart from some stuff compiled with a non-commercial intel C compiler).
While I'll be one of the first to put my boot into intel and their behind-the-market sloppy overpriced inefficient CPUs, it would be at least fair to do it on a reasonably even playing field.
I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
I had this same problem too, and I could not turn it off in the BIOS. My 1 Ghz chip ran at 500Mhz most of the time, even when plugged in.
If you look at the front side bus speeds of the Pentium M, they're low. Very low, in fact, at 400MHz. Certainly not in the 800MHz -1066MHz range that's required for a lot of operations. A 1.5GHz P-M is about the equivalent of a 2.4GHz P4 Northwood UNLESS it comes to data-intensive operations requiring FSB access, and then it gets constricted.
Let's reserve judgment on the P-M's future unless and until Intel builds a higher FSB speed or unless the biggest priority is low overall system power.
My Athlon64 rig is solid as a rock and the more articles I encounter like this, the more I believe I switched over from Intel at the right time. I think AMD has pulled ahead permanently this time. Like most ./ers, I put together my own 'rig', allowing me to select the most highly rated, well-known and supported components at an affordable price. I have no need for underpowered systems with a bunch of useless software bundles - I prefer to put my money where I know it counts.
I'm not a 14 yr old gamer, either. I earn a living designing software. The Athlon64 is about the best price/performaner (esp. considering the 'free' upgrade when moving to a 64-bit OS) that's come along in a very long time.
It seems to me that midrange AMD is far better than midrange Intel for games -- so this is probably why the impression "AMD rules for games" is out there. Buncha kids with no money think it is.
But my 3.2 P4 Northwood running at 3.52 with 6800GT seems plenty competitive -- with everything except the FX 55, which is *extraordinarily expensive*.
It seems that AMD is better at the low end and the extreme high end, but the "ordinary" high end (3500+ and 3.2 P4), Intel and AMD are about the same. Plus with things like MPEG encoding and compiling, which is also important to me, P4 beats even the AMD FX.
So AMD is only better than Intel at the extreme high end and the low end. But the low end isn't worth playing at, unless you ain't got no money.
So in short it seems to me that in the real world a 3.2@3.52 P4 is plenty great for games.
Or would an AMD 3500+ give me a "smoother feeling" experience?
I don't know where you get your info, but i've had a 64 since march and it's been rock solid. The major problems with stability people have with a 64 is:
1. Amperage too low on 12V rail. This is becomming more common with all systems. A number of Mobo makers are now taking the CPUs power out of the 12V rail, and since the memory controller is integrated into the CPU, well you see the issue. It's a simple fix, get a decent PSU with at least 20+ amps on the 12V rail.
2. Memory. A common problem with ALL machines. This is also an easy fix: BUY DECENT MEMORY. You don't need corsair, but get a respected name. People also claim that you can't run at any timings faster than 3-3-3, but that ISN'T the case. I'm typing this with a Gig of PC 3200 running 2-3-3. Haven't tried to oc it because I have no need, but tighter timings might be possible.
As far as overclocking goes, no you won't get massive numbers, but with the basic understanding that you're dealing with more than just FSB and multiplyer, you can get a decent overclock.
Intel fan boys need to calm down. Netburst hasn't been what intel needed. AMD gave them plenty of warning that they were going to release a pretty advanced chip. Intel decided that GHZ are what matter, and that everyone would want an Itanium for 64 bit computing. wrong on both accounts. It's good to know that they are going back to more reliable tech, but when I have a cool running, stable machine that can go toe to toe with an Intel Extreme Edition (I hate extreme marketing) and cost me a fraction of the price, I'm happy.
John 3:16 - The easiest way to a BETTER YOU.
My ideal laptop for college was an Apple G4, but school insisted on Windows for it's 'stability, reliability, and security'.... yea, that's a joke in itself.
Decided to get an IBM Thinkpad with a Pentium IV Mobile.
Everyone with laptops running P4's seen to have issues with heat, and power consumption. Despite my oversided screen, dual HD's, and CD-RW... I'm actually doing all right.
It cost more to get a laptop with a real mobile chip, rather than just a P4 as some companies offer... but I think it saved me a lot of trouble.
I had this same problem too, and I could not turn it off in the BIOS. My 1 Ghz chip ran at 500Mhz most of the time, even when plugged in.
/proc/cpuinfo will only reflect how things looked when you booted, but it doesn't mean your CPU speed isn't changing. see cpufreq (/proc/cpurfreq)
The info returned by
The pentium M is NOT a P4 at heart, it's an intel i686 core (same as PIII) with added instructions and a different bus to the northbridge. It has the same feature set of a P4 but that doesn't make it a P4.
GCC-3.4.3 has a "-march=pentium-m" option, btw.
If you're stuck with an older gcc, try:
"march=pentium3 -msse2"
which should get you as close as can be to optimal scheduling.
Using "march=pentium4" will probably yield slower code than using just "pentium3" because the scheduling for these CPUs is so different.
I spend too much time doing this shit.
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
That's not true. Some laptops use a Mobile Pentium IV (upt to 3.2 Ghz w/533Mhz FSB), while others use a plain Pentium IV (up to 3.4 Ghz w/800 Mhz FSB). See Pentium IV vs. Mobile Pentium IV.
I do agree with you about the Pentium-M, though.
Try eMusic. DRM free, legal, MP3 downloads.