| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 38851 | 2003-10-20 08:57:00 | Which Processor | suethomo (4694) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 185111 | 2003-10-21 09:52:00 | AMD ALL THE WAY!!!!! | agent_24 (4330) | ||
| 185112 | 2003-10-21 10:02:00 | Indeed, the P4-M CPUs are designed specifically for laptops, and run cooler and consume less power than the standard P4, designed for desktop systems. Arguably, there is very little difference between the performance of a P4 at 2.6GHz and an AMD Athlon XP 2600+ - very little at all (although if you want to get gritty and state that the 2600+ is only running at something like 2.4GHz, you could do that, but the Athlon XP series has been tightly built to run that little bit faster with Windows XP, if my knowledge is correct). So if you want to save a few hundred dollars, then go for the AMD one (I've seen systems where the difference between getting an AMD or an Intel CPU is $500, believe it or not, and there's probably bigger differences out there too). |
agent (30) | ||
| 185113 | 2003-10-21 10:11:00 | I would say an extended warranty is a complete waste of time because it usually costs more than a HD or whatever that might break down. I was also born an optimistic. | mikebartnz (21) | ||
| 185114 | 2003-10-21 10:23:00 | Is there is big diff on prices?? Without considering prices, I say Intel. Less heat ... for battery. Intel tends to be more stable with a Intel chipset too. |
nomad (3693) | ||
| 185115 | 2003-10-21 12:39:00 | If the AMD is cheaper then thats reason 1. If the AMD is a mobile processor and the P4 is not, then thats reason 2. And you won't notice much difference in speed between the chips so thats reason 3 for AMD. One of Godfather's favourite pastimes is to cook bacon & eggs on his Laptop with desktop P4 chip in it. (If I remember correctly :D). |
PoWa (203) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||