Originally posted by: Enig101
The chart in the first part of this thread might help:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=18483
From what I gather, an older Pentium M has roughly the same performance as a Core Solo at the same GHz.
Extremely good article. Bookmarked for sure.
"Core Solo 1.66GHz - 3.0GHz P4"
"P-M 1.60GHz - 3.0GHz P4"
Thats about as high up as they compare it but i have a core solo at 1.86ghz on my laptop. I would have to guess that my 1.86ghz core solo is about as fast as a P-M at 1.73 ghz. It seems like per mhz, the core solo is slower than the P-M? Core solo is really just a core duo with one of the cores disabled. Core solo are basically core duo cpus that did not pass quality check controls (if one of the cores wasnt working in example).
"The "Solo" models have one processor core, making them essentially Pentium-Ms with faster FSBs."
The question isnt speed that i care about but which is more energy efficient? Infact, if i had the money, i would but the low voltage or ultra low voltage cpus when they come out. Sure they are much slower but the battery life is worth it (for a person who actually has a need for mobility).
Ok i just found out. Core Duo uses 31 watts and Core solo is nearly identical to P-M in power usage, 27 watts for regular and 5.5-6 for low voltage. Solo doesnt have Ultra Low Voltage cpus. P-M does that goes 5watt max i believe. So there you have it, Core Solo is quite close to P-M, just buy which ever is cheaper as the performance is close to the same.