March 2nd, 2007, 08:55 PM #1
How do I compare Centrino to Core 2 Duo?
I have two options here and am hoping someone can tell me how much speed difference I am going to see between these two CPUs:
Core 2 Duo T5500 1.66GHz w/ 2GB RAM
Centrino @1.4Ghz Pentium M w/ 1.0GB Ram
Not sure if I should splurge for the more expensive one. If the speed is much faster, I will but if it is not much different, I dont see a reason why. One is half the price of the other.
March 2nd, 2007, 09:24 PM #2
Centrino is not really a CPU, but a platform that manufacturers must stick to in order to get the brand name of Centrino. The Pentium M is the CPU.
Anyways, I would get the Core 2, it will be much faster.
Although, if you don't plan on doing anything CPU intensive, I might spring for the P-M, because of the price difference.
March 2nd, 2007, 09:44 PM #3
Thank you for your help. My work generally consists of Firefox, IE, PDFs, Word, Excel and a lot of remote connections. Nothing too exciting.
I assume the above isn't considered "intensive." Intensive is like gaming or Photoshop, right?
March 2nd, 2007, 09:50 PM #4
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- BrisVegas, Australia
- Blog Entries
What OS will it be running? If Vista, 1GB RAM will only just get it running smoothly. If you can, stick with XP if you go with the Pentium M and 1GB RAM.
MickI don't like sigs on forums like this.
March 2nd, 2007, 09:58 PM #5
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- San Diego, CA
I would HIGHLY recommend 2GB of ram for Vista... Like Mickwish said, 1GB is just bearly enough. It's like XP with 512MB... It's fine for the initial install, but ones you have a few programs installed and running, you will see significant slow downs."Opinions not based on knowledge are ugly things"
March 3rd, 2007, 11:11 AM #6
No, those programs won't take up too much CPU, so if you're staying with XP, which I would at this point, I get the Pentium M, and save some dough.
March 5th, 2007, 04:37 AM #7
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
It really depends on what you use the computer for. I've owned 2 machines with the P-M processor (1.4GHz and 1.7GHz) and now my current notebook has a core2duo (1.83GHz).
The only time I see if a difference is when under a heavy load, like video encoding. Otherwise, for normal day to day type stuff, you'd be hard pressed to notice a difference. 90% of the time I have the notebook set to max battery (runs @ 900mhz) and it handles just about everything just fine and keeps the temps down. I did the same with the two P-M's.
When I got the P-M 1.4GHz, I benched it against my P4 desktop I had at the time (2.8GHz HT) using the same video source. The time to encode was a wash - with the 2.8GHz being maybe 3 sec faster. I did the same test with the Core2Duo and the current desktop (3.4GHz northwood) -- and it was 40 sec faster - which is quite a bit, but that is really the only situation you'll see a difference, or perhaps rendering something with 3Dmax, autocad, etc.
If the computer in question is a notebook, I'd go with the 1.4GHz -- if it's going into a desktop, I'd probably eat the difference and go with the core2duo, as it'll make future upgrades cheaper.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By RedKidd in forum MotherboardsReplies: 23Last Post: January 28th, 2008, 02:22 AM
By cableuser in forum General Tech DiscussionReplies: 4Last Post: September 3rd, 2006, 04:43 PM
By RamonGTP in forum Processors, Memory, and OverclockingReplies: 49Last Post: July 25th, 2006, 03:00 PM
By wheelie007 in forum Processors, Memory, and OverclockingReplies: 21Last Post: April 23rd, 2006, 11:07 AM
By xianrowanx in forum General Tech DiscussionReplies: 8Last Post: January 29th, 2006, 11:38 AM