ATHLON 1.4Ghz faster than laptop PENTIUM IV 2Ghz? How is that possible?

[fLYtRap]

I have recently notice that my desktop AMD ATHLON 1.4Ghz is faster than my laptop PENTIUM IV 2Ghz I'm not sure exacly how much but I would say about 25%. How is that possible

[yoda313]

Does the laptop have more RAM???

You'd have to give more specifics about which app and how much you're doing at the same time. Also was it a fresh install of windows? Or are you using different operating systems on the two computers?

Perhaps you do less on your laptop so more resources are available for your particular applicaiton that seems to go faster??? Have you recently defragged the harddrive on the laptop and not the desktop? Have you done virus checks/spamchecks on both machines??

You need to diagnose the symptoms more than just simple obsverations to determine the speed differences.

[fLYtRap]

Bouth of them have 512mb memory and none of them have internet, so viruses, spam, spyware etc = zero. Each runs XP PRO. I just notice that today when I was trying to recover data from my damaged cd disc. That was only running task.

[yoda313]

SO maybe the cdrom has a faster read rate???

[fLYtRap]

I was also doing a couple other tasks without a drive and the AMD was faster.
One of them was very simple, copying a file from a flsh drive to hard drive.

[yoda313]

Here's a thought - is it a pentium m mobile chip? Aren't they supposed to be a little slower since they are a different design than a standard desktop pentium????

[fLYtRap]

Laptop is Pentium 4 and desktop is AMD Athlon.

[edDV]

So you are saying the disk system is faster on the desktop. That would be expected. Laptop drives run slower and chipset power modes may be slowing it further.

Try a pure CPU task like encoding to see how computation speed differs.

As for games, the desktop likely has a much more powerful display card.

[Abbadon]

I have recently notice that my desktop AMD ATHLON 1.4Ghz is faster than my laptop PENTIUM IV 2Ghz I'm not sure exacly how much but I would say about 25%. How is that possible

It is because the Pentium 4 is the biggest piece of crap ever created.

[Super Warrior]

I have recently notice that my desktop AMD ATHLON 1.4Ghz is faster than my laptop PENTIUM IV 2Ghz I'm not sure exacly how much but I would say about 25%. How is that possible

I had a similiar occurence.

My last desktop had 2.8Ghz Celeron-D w/256k L2 cache, and 512MB DDR ram. I sold that desktop and got a Dell laptop as my primary computer. It has: 1.4Ghz Celeron-M w/1MB L2 cache, and 512MB DDR2 ram.

The Dell laptop is noticabley *FASTER* dispite the slower CPU speed. I guess i would attribute this to the laptop processor having 1MB L2 cache and the Ram being DDR2.

Just goes to show that sheer processor clock-speed alone, does not determine how fast a system can perform

[JerryB]

hi,
there could be many reasons.... and no one thing will determine how fast or slow a system is going to be.... it a combination of things...
1. the color resolution and screen resolution, if in 16 bit color that a whole faste than 24/32 bit color....!!
2. the graphic card and how much graphic ram.. generally, laptop have embded graphic chips and need to borrow ram from your regular ram, so besides not having that much ram for regular operating the amount that is being borrowed and used for graphics is small... bottom line on laptop this can slow things down overall!!!
3. the hard drive some are faster than others,
4. what your fsb (motherboard bus) ? that can make a big difference on a system .....
5. how many programs that startup at windows boot and how well they get along..smile with each other... that can make a big difference.....
bottom line I think you can probably do a lot of simple tweaking to get your llap top up to speed... but there certain thing your not going to be able to do with a laptop..!!

I have recently notice that my desktop AMD ATHLON 1.4Ghz is faster than my laptop PENTIUM IV 2Ghz I'm not sure exacly how much but I would say about 25%. How is that possible

[greymalkin]

I have recently notice that my desktop AMD ATHLON 1.4Ghz is faster than my laptop PENTIUM IV 2Ghz I'm not sure exacly how much but I would say about 25%. How is that possible

It is because the Pentium 4 is the biggest piece of crap ever created.

wow..fanboy alert. You are an idiot.

[JohnnyMalaria]

I have recently notice that my desktop AMD ATHLON 1.4Ghz is faster than my laptop PENTIUM IV 2Ghz I'm not sure exacly how much but I would say about 25%. How is that possible

It is because the Pentium 4 is the biggest piece of crap ever created.

Now, that may seem a bit extreme but there is some basis to it.

When Intel introduced the Pentium 4 (P4), it was apparent that it was inferior to the Pentium III (P3) at a given clock speed. I remember very well reading Intel's own benchmarking results for intensive processing (e.g., matrix arithmetic) and was astonished that the P4 was slower than the P3. The P4 was rushed to market and, as a result, lacked a decent L2 cache. Intel tried to claim it didn't matter and that the P4 had a better/longer processing pipeline and other PR cr@p.

However, at the time, the P3 technology was at its limit - heating problems etc meant the chip was as fast as it would ever get based on the technology available. The P4 was a new design that permitted higher clock speeds.

The AMD chips of the same era were always faster than the P4 clock-for-clock. AMD named their chips according to the equivalent P4 clock speed. e.g., an Athlon 3800+ doesn't actually run at 3800+ MHz but performs like a 3800+ MHz P4.

While the P4 prevailed (for Intel, anyway), AMD always had the upper edge in performance. AMD maintained a decent L2 cache.

With improvements in technology during the ensuing years, Intel were able to develop the old P3 architecture to operate much faster without the thermal problems. They added SSE2/3 to the chip and, in an early guise, rebranded it as the Pentium M.

In my own experience, a Thinkpad laptop running with a 1.8GHz P4 is slower than one with a 1.5GHz Pentium M.

Intel's Core Duo line uses two of the P3-derived cores and features a decent L2 cache. Consequently, Intel are once again as good as - if not better - than AMD.

In short, the P4 was a technical disaster - needed seriously high clock speeds to overcome the fundamental limitations of the missing cache. Of course, it was a marketing success. Since the Pentium M, however, Intel have resurrected the successful P3 pedigree.

It doesn't mean that the P4 should be avoided, though. With the push for Core Duo systems, OEMs such as Dell and Gateway have dual core P4 systems to clear from stock. You can get some powerful machines for a song.

[fLYtRap]

I see. So what about Intel Celeron that can be exchangable with either P3 or P4 in some models

[lordsmurf]

CPU is only one consideration. That's all this is.

Hard drive speed, software installed, OS, RAM, CPU features, etc. They all make a difference in overall performance.

I can bog down or pep up a system simply with my choice of resident software and OS. Then secondary consideration with hard drives and RAM make a big difference too. Everything also has point of diminishing returns, which is why, for example, 4GB of RAM on a Pentium II will not be faster than a P4 with 128MB of RAM.

The griping about P4 being less than a perfect upgrade over AMD or Pentium III is also 5 years outdated, that ended when the Willamette CPU architecture was scrapped for Northwood. There really is no direct correlation between AMD and Intel, they design CPUs for different tasks (Intel goes for business and video, AMD goes for games and general consumer use).

Right now is also a good time for buying notebooks. As mentioned above, the older Core Duo (as in early 2006 old) is being sold for a song because the newer Core 2 Duo (as in mid 2006 new) is already pushing it into an early obselete age. I grabbed one myself here last week, and on some things its faster than my main computer, on some its slower.

[JohnnyMalaria]

I see. So what about Intel Celeron that can be exchangable with either P3 or P4 in some models

The name Celeron has been applied to many different Intel processors.

The first Celerons were Pentium II processors without the L2 cache - they were a lot cheaper than the true PII equivalents, could be easily overclocked and, for tasks such as video rendering, were just as fast (the L2 cache made no difference to performance).

Ever since then, Intel have provided a cheaper version (reduced performance supposedly) of the current generation of processors.

There's a detailed history here: http://www.e-articles.info/e/a/title/Pentium-6-Intel-Celeron-~-History-and-features/

So - it all depends which Celeron you are talking about! It has become very confusing.

[Abbadon]

I have recently notice that my desktop AMD ATHLON 1.4Ghz is faster than my laptop PENTIUM IV 2Ghz I'm not sure exacly how much but I would say about 25%. How is that possible

It is because the Pentium 4 is the biggest piece of crap ever created.

wow..fanboy alert. You are an idiot.

I am not a fan boy, I wasted good money getting a pentium 4, I used to work with a pentium 3, and I noticed how bad the Pentium 4 performance was. You don't know about technology, that's all.

Next time you insult someone, try doing some research.

[redwudz]

fLYtRap, you can run a benchmarking program like the freeware version of SiSoftware Sandra and see where the problem is, if there is one. It can check and compare most of the systems in a computer. It may be the CPU or other hardware or the software: http://files.extremeoverclocking.com/file.php?f=75

And fLYtRap, in the future please use a more descriptive subject title in your posts to allow others to search for similar topics. I will change yours this time. From our rules:

Try to choose a subject that describes your topic.
Please do not use topic subjects like Help me!!! or Problems.

Thanks, Moderator redwudz

[fLYtRap]

fLYtRap, you can run a benchmarking program like the freeware version of SiSoftware Sandra and see where the problem is, if there is one. It can check and compare most of the systems in a computer. It may be the CPU or other hardware or the software: http://files.extremeoverclocking.com/file.php?f=75

And fLYtRap, in the future please use a more descriptive subject title in your posts to allow others to search for similar topics. I will change yours this time. From our rules:

Try to choose a subject that describes your topic.
Please do not use topic subjects like Help me!!! or Problems.

Thanks, Moderator redwudz

I don't think there is a problem in any of those machines, they bouth works fine, its just something that got my attention.

I see your point about thread title...

[offline]

Here's a thought - is it a pentium m mobile chip? Aren't they supposed to be a little slower since they are a different design than a standard desktop pentium????

No. Faster.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_M

[lordsmurf]

Not faster or slower, just less of a power consumer.

[glockjs]

if i remember right the mobiles have a better architecture than the p4's.

as far as OP there are too many variables to point at just the cpu. hell just running on battery can slow your performance when it comes to laptops :/

[offline]

Not faster or slower, just less of a power consumer.

The M series is faster per MHz than the P4 mobile and desktop CPU because it's core is P3 based. If you have ever owned one and compared it to a desktop or mobile p4, the difference is significant. Even the celeron M kicks the P4 to the curb. An old P3 M 1 GHz can outrun a P4 1.4 Ghz

[free is better]

i like the information johnny supplied. it is true about different factors making a difference in the results one will get, but lately with the introduction of the new core duo more information concerning the superiority of the p3 core over the p4 is appearing on the web. i would like to say that the performance of original architectures whether p3 or athlon are spectacular when you look at how they perform in everday tasks and what individuals are willing to accept from their systems. toms hardware has benchmarks on the website enabling you to look at a variety of processors at the same time running a specific benchmark and it used to show the early athlon. although time is an important factor other elements of the system can be adjusted to improve performance drastically. i am in the process of doing a side by side comparison of two systems that i own. although not the very cutting edge the difference between the two is the point and anyone can do the same. one system is an xp2900 box, 400 mhz bus, 512 mb ram with a sata drive (separate partition for the os) and the other is a p3 dualie with 933 mhz processors, 512 mb ram, 133 mhz bus and u160 scsi 10k rpm drives (separate os and storage). i am going to perform everyday tasks like video conversions and dvd rips using the same dvd burner. all i am saying is that one should choose a desk sytem or laptop based on the performance that the individual is willing to accept regardless of the vintage of the cpu.

[Ditka1985]

Another thing to consider with laptop vs. desktop performance is that many laptop systems will intentionally reduce CPU clock speed to conserve battery or reduce heat. So even though the processor may be marked 2GHz, the clock speed at which it is operating may have been reduced.

I experienced this exact thing the other day. One of the newer laptops where I work showed up as running at 1.2 GHz, whereas an older one showed 2.0. Both were unplugged at the time. The newer one was set to reduce speed when unplugged to save battery.

That said, "performance" as we perceive it is actually made up of numerous factors, as people on here have pointed out.

[fLYtRap]

Another thing to consider with laptop vs. desktop performance is that many laptop systems will intentionally reduce CPU clock speed to conserve battery or reduce heat. So even though the processor may be marked 2GHz, the clock speed at which it is operating may have been reduced.

I experienced this exact thing the other day. One of the newer laptops where I work showed up as running at 1.2 GHz, whereas an older one showed 2.0. Both were unplugged at the time. The newer one was set to reduce speed when unplugged to save battery.

That said, "performance" as we perceive it is actually made up of numerous factors, as people on here have pointed out.

There is one thing that I don't like about new laptops, which is when run on a battery the screen is getting dimmed. Also I notice that batterys for new laptops have much less life than older ones. For example a battery in my Presario 2500 P4 runs only for about an hour and on Presario 1800 P3 runs for about 3 hours. And the plus on 1800 is that the screen stays as bright as would run on a power supply.

[JohnnyMalaria]

There is one thing that I don't like about new laptops, which is when run on a battery the screen is getting dimmed.

All the laptops I've used for the last 6+ years have done this. You can disable it usually. e.g., on a Thinkpad, there's an LCD configuration option.

Also I notice that batterys for new laptops have much less life than older ones. For example a battery in my Presario 2500 P4 runs only for about an hour and on Presario 1800 P3 runs for about 3 hours. And the plus on 1800 is that the screen stays as bright as would run on a power supply.

The 1800 has a max CPU speed of 1GHz (depending on model). Max CPU power consumption: 34W at 1GHz, 16.1W at 700MHz (battery-optimized mode)

The 2500 has a max CPU spead of 3.06 GHz (depending on model). Max CPU power consumption: 103W at 3.06GHz, 48W at 1.86GHz (battery-optimized mode)

That represents a considerable chunk of the battery life difference.

Also, does your 2500 have integrated wireless? If so, that also saps power even when you aren't connected.

The battery capacity for the 2500 is listed as 4400mAh compared to 4000mAh for the 1800.

[RabidDog]

The P4 relied on faster and faster processor speeds to imcrease performance, but Intel quiclky realized that the heat and power requirements simply became untenable (gigawatts of power and venusian heat levels) Athlon does more work per cycle, so not so many cpu cycles needed so processor can run slower and cooler,
Intel went back to the p3 and incorporated some of the design improvements from the pentium-m, which worked much more like an athlon and called it the core line now into its second iteration, and is, undoubtedly the finest processor on the planet.