Mobile Athlon XP vs Pentium M

[k900]

Does anyone know where I can find benchmarks comparing the Mobile Athlon XP to the Pentium M? I've done a lot of searching with no luck.

Thanks,
Kevin

 

[ActuaryTm]

Most AMD mobile machines these days (save the sub $1,000 category) seem to be of the 64-bit variety. As such, with these results (courtesty of Anand himself) one should be able to extrapolate where the various mobile Xp processors fall in line with both the mobile 64-bit and the Pentium-M.

 

[Connoisseur]

you have to be careful. Mobile Athlon XP's are the 32-bit barton variety chips. Clock for clock, the P-M will beat these out as far as performance. The mobile Athlon 64's on the other hand will have either even or slightly better gaming performance than equally clocked P-M's. The A64's are probably a bit cheaper but they come at the expense of greater power usage. Furthermore, if you use a 64-bit OS, the A64 will theoretically have even greater performance...not necessarily in gaming because neither ATI nor Nvidia have yet released 64-bit optimized drivers.

 

[vegetation]

Originally posted by: Connoisseur
you have to be careful. Mobile Athlon XP's are the 32-bit barton variety chips. Clock for clock, the P-M will beat these out as far as performance. The mobile Athlon 64's on the other hand will have either even or slightly better gaming performance than equally clocked P-M's. The A64's are probably a bit cheaper but they come at the expense of greater power usage. Furthermore, if you use a 64-bit OS, the A64 will theoretically have even greater performance...not necessarily in gaming because neither ATI nor Nvidia have yet released 64-bit optimized drivers.

Well you have to be careful on AMD's marketing names as well. XP-M could mean Barton or the A64 core. The A64 variety starts at 1.6GHz but with less cache than the A64 and 64 bit disabled, but otherwise it's the same chip as the A64.

edit: my informal testing seems to show that the XP-M 3000+ (1.6GHz / 256k cache) is pretty much dead on with a Dothan 1.6.

 

[cirthix]

clock for clock, the mobile a64s and pentium-ms are pretty dammn close, with the axp falling behind a little and the p-4 being miserably in the dirt both performance wise and battery life wise, along with the fact that you may have a burned lap when you're done

 

[fbrdphreak]

First of all, if it says XP-M; then it is an Athlon XP-Mobile. Barton core, I think like 35W power dissipation, 512KB L2 Cache, 333MHz FSB, etc. The Pentium-M will perform better and have better batt life. However, the XP-M is no slouch on a notebook for general useage. With a 15" screen on lowest brightness using wireless you can expect ~3 hours on a 6-cell batt; not too shabby. And the XP-M based notebooks are dirt cheap now. The biggest manufacturers of them are HP/Compaq & eMachines.
If you can afford it, definitely go with the P-M tho. Better perf, better batt life, and overall an astounding piece of computer architecture.

 

[abovewood]

> With a 15" screen on lowest brightness using wireless you can expect ~3 hours on a 6-cell batt; not too shabby.

screen on lowest brightness is too much a trade off.
I usually go with one step blow the higgest brightness when using a laptop for anything.