Intel still rules over AMD in mobile market!

[Firestorm]

Most of you guys are paying attention to desktop cpu only. However, you guys really should think about notebooks more. Many people believe notebooks are going to take over desktop sales by 2010. Here is <A HREF="http://www.crn.com/sections/News/Top_News.asp?RSID=CRN&ArticleID=48222" target="_new">one example </A> of this idea.

First of all AMD has no CPU for handhelds and don't see any AMD based tablet PCs either! Even via and some other little know cpu makes have tablet PC based on thier cpus, but don't see an AMD one yet! Of course AMD has no $$ to research makes these I guess.

Right now as it stands in notebooks, Intel has best cpu out their for laptops the pentium M. They offer top good performance with the best battery life and wieght. Intel also has power P4 for notebooks too.

Right now AMD's main mobile CPU is the athlon XP M, which is capped out at 2500. There really isn't much reason to put it, some may say its cheap but you can do better for the same $$. You can get more powerful<A HREF="http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/inspn_5100?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs" target="_new"> P4 2.8 (dell inprision 5600)</A> for only $999. Also you get Pentium M laptop from <A HREF="http://www.powernotebooks.com/products.php3?display_size=14" target="_new"> powernotebooks </A> for $1150. With those prices no real reason to go for AMD, unless you are just a die hard fanboy.

Of course their is the mobile Athlon 64 for desktop replacement. However, they are heavy and thier battery life sucks. A64 M are very expensive and ther is hardly any place to buy them from. You can get cheaper and possilby faster P4. Have <A HREF="http://www.powernotebooks.com/specials.php3?model_id=301" target="_new"> look here </A>, you can probably get the 3.2 800 FSB P4 customize wiht 7200 rpm HD for $1650. There really isn't a A64 with that performace for same prices!
(There is an emachine A64 3000+ notebook for around $1600, however everyone knows emachines makes crap. Not to mention it has only 4200 rpm HD and you can't customize it, so it kill performance totally)

There are Intel Pentium 4 EE out there to counter A64 too! Dell just released a <A HREF="http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/inspn_xps?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs" target="_new">3.4 P4 EE with 9700 ati radeon card!</A> P4EE is defintely faster than A64 and not mention you can only get 9600 radeom with A64. If you are dying for top performance in a laptop you will have to get P4EE!

All of this really leaves no reason to buy AMD based laptops. Again, unless you are die hard AMD fanboy There is only couple of laptop with them, while there 1000s with intel CPUs. As it stands now Intel will be releasing more power P-M soon, while all AMD has is the power hungry mobile CPU. AMD simply doesn't have the resources Intel has to put into different types of CPUs. At this rate when notebook takes over desktop CPUs, intel will be at lead with AMD far behind!

 

[jihiggs]

you dont have leg to stand on. no one here gives a sh1t about notebooks.

wpdclan.com cs game server - 64.246.52.144:27015
now featuring (optional) cheating death!

 

[Xeon]

I like notebooks.

Xeon

<font color=orange>Scratch Here To Reveal Prize</font color=orange>

 

[juin]

First of all AMD has no CPU for handhelds and don't see any AMD based tablet PCs either! Even via and some other little know cpu makes have tablet PC based on thier cpus, but don't see an AMD one yet! Of course AMD has no $$ to research makes these I guess

They got the alchemist ligne.

i need to change useur name.

 

[endyen]

You say the fastest xp-m is the 2500+. Wrong, the fastest xp-m is the 3000+. The rest of what you say is every bit as accurate.

 

[Spitfire_x86]

Nobody ever said AMD is the best for notebooks

------------
<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A>

<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig</A> & <A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/benchmark.html" target="_new">3DMark score</A>

 

[phial]

omg.. how hypocritical can you get. this is the biggest fanboy post ive seen in weeks. why dont you rub your Intel laptop all over your penis, you seem to love em that much


look, dude, its a company. a corporation. stop treating it like its a game between your favorite team and the opposition, because your favorite team wants to trick/PR you into spending your money just as much as the next

There is only couple of laptop with them, while there 1000s with intel CPUs.

my workplace has about 500 workstations, with P4 1.7ghz processors and 256megs/ram.. they are [-peep-] slow. they would have been much better going with 1700+'s and spending the money saved on extra ram. the 1700+ would be faster too

so dont gimme that bullsh!t. the only reason INtel has more CPU's out there is because they are an older company, and AMD has only really had a good name for the last 5 years or so. 45 year old Network Administrators are obviously gonna recommend intel over amd, because its what they were raised on, and arent going to pay attention to the real performance/value at all. trust me, ive SEEEN it with my own eyes many times. i used to work in a computer store and my boss would sell 800mhz Celeron2's over 1ghz athlons, just because htey were intel. the athlon was cheaper and 2x faster. so theres always two sides to the coin , hypocrite


-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>

 

[pauldh]

IMO, I don't blame big businesses for going Intel. Especially not back when your company probably ordered those computers. Less troubles and they can afford the extra cost of the hardware but not down time or lost man hours. Reliability, compatibility, stability is what it's about in that setting. As far as home owners, yeah an XP1700+ would definately be a step up in performance over the Willamette's.

Back to laptops. Sure it's nice to own one, but I rarely get excited about them as I can't build one and that's where the fun is for me.



ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt

 

[TheRod]

trust me, ive SEEEN it with my own eyes many times. i used to work in a computer store and my boss would sell 800mhz Celeron2's over 1ghz athlons, just because htey were intel. the athlon was cheaper and 2x faster. so theres always two sides to the coin , hypocrite

I agree 200% with you, I've seen this many times and not only for CPU, for GPU and HDD.

How often I see people buying GeForce MX cards, because they are nVidia GeForce and they think they are the best cards! And how often I saw people buying/selling HDD that were not good performer, just because they wanted a Western Digital or a Maxtor...

I think that 80% to 90% of PC buyer's are not aware of price/performance and 80% to 90% PC stores only wants to sells systems, they don't care about price/performance because they know that 80% to 90% of their customer don't know anything about this!



--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?

 

[phial]

thats all well and good Paul, if AMD was less stable than Intel. my amd system is overclocked to the hilt (for my cpu at least) and its 100% stable, i leave it on for days at a time , running modern games and stuff which are more stressful than most word processors

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>

 

[Spitfire_x86]

I agree 200% with you, I've seen this many times and not only for CPU, for GPU and HDD.

n00bs are less allergic to ATI, compared to AMD

------------
<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A>

<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig</A> & <A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/benchmark.html" target="_new">3DMark score</A>

 

[Johanthegnarler]

My oc'ed barton has been running for the last 3 months without an error yet, not even software error. I never shut it down. But i do use "sleep" to let it chill at night.

<A HREF="http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=1820114224" target="_new">http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=1820114224</A>
46,400 , movin on up. 48k new goal.

 

[pauldh]

yes, I have many AMD systems including the one I most use which is on a KT266A even. That doesn't prove they earned the respect of the big businesses.

But I was thinking when i posted, that back when those P4 1.7's were built it probably meant a Via chipset AMD solution. If I had to pay 500 employees everyday to be at those computers, and couldn't afford to risk downtime, I'd doubt I would have considered a via chipset even if i had many stable ones at home. Even AMD 761 has given me some problems too and wouldn't be any better. I have a fully stable SIS based ECSK7S5A that has been great for me too, but i woundn't stick it into a business setting. Intel Chipsets with Intel CPU's have earned big business respect. AMD is fine. Via though, especially a few years ago was better off in a home setting than a business. I try not to do any builds for busineses, but when i did I usually built Intel choosing the most stable mobo I knew about as aposed to say the best enthusiast board. I was not at all knocking AMD personally, just think Via/AMD to most businesses meant too much risk. Whether deserved or not, they couldn't afford to experiment.

It's like Chrysler cars or Dodge trucks to me. They look to be good options, but can you trust them? I finally did when I needed a Minivan and like the chrysler T&C's best. I did however buy the extended waranty as I expect more hassles than on my ford taurus. Anyway, I am saying if inferiority is perceived, whether justifiable or not, a business has to be more leary than you or I do at home.


ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt

 

[phial]

yea i see your point now...

back then, they didnt have the chipsets they have now .. so yea heh

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>

 

[phial]

n00bs are less allergic to ATI, compared to AMD

i think its because AMD and Intel can be neck-and-neck for performance at times, while ATI is a whole level above nVidia

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>

 

[trooper11]

well amd may not have mobile or handheld chips of great count, they do however work in other areas, most specifically, flash ram, and that is used in many handhelds and even some tablet pcs. Personally, I think its ok for amd to focus on desktops, with the much smaller R&D budget compared to intel, they cant risk spreading themselves too thin. Besids, desktops and servers are still the cash cow of the industry, and thats where you want to make the most progress in developing your product. If amd make progress in desktops, then it wont be as hard to gian respect in laptops. you probably wont see amd competition in laptops for quite a few years.

 

[pauldh]

Thx, i can see your aguement too as I know I'd rather own the Xp1700+ on an NF2 over any 400 bus P4 running PC133. A P4 1.7 GHz paired with PC133 is ghastly slow.

You know I also don't personally believ businesses should avoid AMD now. Not at all. But I just can fully understand in general why they still feel that way. If you were in charge of ordering those systems for your company and the AMD solution saved money and all went smooth, you'd gain a little respect for both yourself and AMD. Although probably no rewards. If however, you purchased the AMD's and Via Bugs came back to bite you, you'd get fired and your name and AMD's would be dirt. I'd be scared to push that switch. Intel is the safe bet as if they bombed I doubt your job would be in jeapardy. They don't know now as we do, that AMD/NForce2 isn't = to AMD/Via KT266. Or if they do, they won't be the ones to risk their neck trying it. Unfortunate for AMD though.



ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt