Desktop vs. Mobile

[Atodd]

How does this work? Mobile processors, which can be dropped in the same slot as any Desktop processor, are not commonly used. However, they take less power consumption and offer the same performance. If this is true, then why not just use them all the time in Desktop systems?

 

[Shimmishim]

well... not all mobile processors work in desktop mobo's

the pentium M or banias cores don't...

a lot of the mobile A64 chips will not work in most normal desktop mobo's either...

but you do pose a good point...

 

[orangat]

The mobile A64 versions do not support cool-and-quiet. They have some other similar functionality. They are not basically identical.

 

[Megatomic]

Well, most of the XP-M chips are S462. Why don't more XP-M chips get used in desktop systems? And why aren't XP-M chips supported by desktop motherboard makers by default?

Good questions, I'm bookmarking this thread in hopes of good convo on this topic.

 

[aka1nas]

They aren't usually supported because they are statistically much rarer than the "regular" chips as they must pass tighter thermal and power tolerances. AMD wouldn't be able to deliver them to most customers or OEMs in sufficient quantity. They seem to be so common because this is an enthusiast site and we are more descriminate buyers and know how much better they perform and so we have a higher portion of them floating around here. The fact that the Athlon XP Mobile is pin compatible with regular 'ol Athlon XPs is more because AMD wanted to save money by not having two sockets or two production lines than because they wanted you to be able to run a mobile chip in a regular board. This is also why they haven't really gone out of their way to make it impossible for us to use them in desktop boards as it isn't really hurting them financially in any way because we are still spending money on their CPUs and we aren't a very numerically significant portion of the market.

 

[Atodd]

Thanks for the answer. That solved a lot of questions that I kept wondering about.

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: Atodd
How does this work? Mobile processors, which can be dropped in the same slot as any Desktop processor, are not commonly used. However, they take less power consumption and offer the same performance. If this is true, then why not just use them all the time in Desktop systems?

XP-Ms can often run with less power consumption at the same speed as its desktop counterpart, this is true. For example, being able to run a mobile at 2.2ghz with 1.5v vs. a stock 3200+ at 1.65v.

A64-Ms can sometimes do this too.

The only problem for the A64 mobiles is that compatibility on desktop boards is pretty low right now.
The XP-Ms have a higher compatibility, I think. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Well, so yes...why not use XP-Ms all the time in desktop systems?
A person could, and I'd even recommend it, if you were going socket 462 (non Athlon 64). It's just that not many know that you can plop a mobile into desktop boards.
Plus, there's the fact that you WILL be playing with BIOS settings to get the chip working to your liking, and many people do not want to do that.
Then there's just the fact that the chip is called a mobile, and most only expect those to be used in laptops.
I guess something like that.

 

[superHARD]

Who cares about heat in a desktop? I have a zalman 7000cu and it is silent and cools GREAT! So I don't see a noisy fan a reason to want low heat cpu's if my low noise zalman works great.

BTW my cpu is a 2.8 prescott OC'ed to 3.4 ghz

 

[Megatomic]

Some of us have cases that don't readily allow for such sweet coolers as that Zalman. I know I can't install one on my NF7-S R2 while it is inside this Antec Sonata.

Anyone who prizes high performance computers that don't make tons of racket care about heat and cooling.