Mobile P4 monday

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 70
    agou9agou9 Posts: 13member
    An 800MHz G4 would be a step up from what's in there for now, but have you checked the system specs for the P4-M mobile systems?



    Processor that runs at up to 1.7GHz with DDR adn depending on the manufacturer, Radeon 7500 mobility or GeForce 4 440 Go graphics.



    Before people start start speculating how hot it will run or how quickly batteries will get drained, take a look at this link,



    <a href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020304comp.htm"; target="_blank">P4-M Intro</a>



    The salient points on processor performance and power consumption can be found here,



    <a href="http://www.intel.com/procs/perf/Mobile/index.htm"; target="_blank">P4-M performance and power consumption</a>



    If Apple truly is going after the "other" 95% of the market, it needs to appeal to that segment's perception of value as well as aesthetics.
  • Reply 42 of 70
    tarbashtarbash Posts: 278member
    An 800 MHz 7445 would probably run neck and neck with a 1.7 GHz P4-M. Take into account that these are P4 chips that as everyone knows are designed mainly for MHz numbers, and not standalone performance. On top of that they are designed for lower power, and with SpeedStep, which will further lessen performance. I'd really like to see the performance of these compared to P3 and Athlon notebooks.



    The DDR chipset does help speed though. Then again, Apple could pull a stunt and put DDR in the next PowerBook for all we know. They did debut AGP graphics hardware with the iBook back in summer of '99 before any other product line, so who knows.



    I think we could possibly see higher than 800 MHz though. Just because 800 is all Motorola might have documented, a higher clocked chip, even if its only 867, could still end up in the high end config, with a 733 low end. This, coupled with a higher res screen, a GeForce4 2go or Radeon 7500, would be nothing to sneeze at. Especially at the $2999 price point. A Dell with P4 1.7/512/30/combo drive/32 MB GeForce4/wireless card/15 inch display is still a ways over $3600.



    Just wait and see what Apple does. Their PowerBook engineers aren't just sitting around playing tabletop football...



    [ 03-04-2002: Message edited by: Tarbash ]</p>
  • Reply 43 of 70
    bigcbigc Posts: 1,224member
    the new P4 is only 12% faster than a P3 1.13 Mhz, but the new vid card gives 65 fps Quake3 at 1600x1200. Therefore, PB to get upgrade to 800 Mhz, 133 FSB and Nvidia 2go video, Lith bateries and better screen res, I hope (with cash-in-hand).
  • Reply 44 of 70
    agou9agou9 Posts: 13member
    Bigc wrote

    [quote] the new P4 is only 12% faster than a P3 1.13 Mhz <hr></blockquote>



    Are you sure about that? Where did that number come from? The numbers on Intel's site, that I linked to previously, paint a different picture.
  • Reply 45 of 70
    [quote]An 800 MHz 7445 would probably run neck and neck with a 1.7 GHz P4-M. Take into account that these are P4 chips that as everyone knows are designed mainly for MHz numbers, and not standalone performance<hr></blockquote>



    Then why bother with 2 cycle latency Trace & Data Cache? why bother with double pumped ALU's? why bother with Load to Store Forwarding? Why Bother with SSE2? Why Bother with a larger ROB than previous x86's? Why bother with Automated Hardware Prefetch? Why bother with the upcoming Hyperthreading (SMT) Technology?



    None of these very complex things that you can't even identify much less have a frozen-chance in hell of explaining, adds to the P4's "Megahertz" rating, yet most adds immensly to the complexity of the P4 processor.



    So basically you don't know what you are talking about.
  • Reply 46 of 70
    bigcbigc Posts: 1,224member
    [quote]Originally posted by agou9:

    <strong>Bigc wrote





    Are you sure about that? Where did that number come from? The numbers on Intel's site, that I linked to previously, paint a different picture.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    FWIW

    <a href="http://www.techtv.com/screensavers/showtell/story/0,24330,3374566,00.html"; target="_blank">Techtv</a>
  • Reply 47 of 70
    agou9agou9 Posts: 13member
    Bigc,



    Thanks for the link. Realistically though, that 12% number you've come up with is rather selective--don't you think?



    Tha



    I think that it'd be interesting to run a series of benchmarks on a new iMac and one of those laptops and compare. Afterall, if we're talking about an 800MHz G4 TiBook, we're basically talking about an iMac in a different form factor (yes, I know that HD and video would likely be different maybe even FSB as the iMac for some inconceivable reason is stuck at 100MHz).
  • Reply 48 of 70
    bigcbigc Posts: 1,224member
    [quote]Originally posted by agou9:

    <strong>Bigc,



    Thanks for the link. Realistically though, that 12% number you've come up with is rather selective--don't you think?

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Well the P4 is 11% faster in LAME (processor intense MP3 encoding) and 11.5% faster in Content Creation (PS, AI, MSWord, Excell, etc) I rounded up.
  • Reply 49 of 70
    tarbashtarbash Posts: 278member
    "Then why bother with 2 cycle latency Trace & Data Cache? why bother with double pumped ALU's? why bother with Load to Store Forwarding? Why Bother with SSE2? Why Bother with a larger ROB than previous x86's? Why bother with Automated Hardware Prefetch? Why bother with the upcoming Hyperthreading (SMT) Technology?



    None of these very complex things that you can't even identify much less have a frozen-chance in hell of explaining, adds to the P4's "Megahertz" rating, yet most adds immensly to the complexity of the P4 processor."





    Yet all this crap you mentioned barely makes it faster than a P3-M. Sure, its complex, that's great. I don't give a damn how complex my processor is as long as it's fast. The next mobile G4 will dethrone this thing.
  • Reply 50 of 70
    macaddictmacaddict Posts: 1,055member
    [quote]A Dell with P4 1.7/512/30/combo drive/32 MB GeForce4/wireless card/15 inch display is still a ways over $3600. <hr></blockquote>



    Really? Dell seems to think they're only charging $2900.
  • Reply 51 of 70
    [quote]Yet all this crap you mentioned barely makes it faster than a P3-M. <hr></blockquote>



    Get out much? A 2.2Gigha Northwood P4 offers significantly more performance than a 1.26Gighz P3-M.



    [quote]Sure, its complex, that's great. I don't give a damn how complex my processor is as long as it's fast.<hr></blockquote>



    The real issue is that you don't give a damn about backing up the claim you've made that:



    "these are P4 chips that as everyone knows are designed mainly for MHz numbers, and not standalone performance"





    [quote]

    The next mobile G4 will dethrone this thing.

    <hr></blockquote>



    RSN?
  • Reply 52 of 70
    tarbashtarbash Posts: 278member
    Radar: Put a single 512 chip in the config instead of 2 256's, add the top end 15 inch display, video software package, and all the trimmings and you've got a much higher price than $2900.



    Johnson:

    Yes, I get out a lot thank you. I do realize a NW 2.2 GHz P4 is significantly faster than a P3-M, but I'M TALKING ABOUT THE P4-M, NOT NORTHWOOD!!





    The benchmarks speak for themselves. If the P4-M was truly designed for performance and not MHz numbers, the performance would be way ahead of the P3-M. We're talking 1.26 GHz vs. 1.7 GHz. That should be quite a leap performance wise, but when you look at the benchmarks, it's nothing to write home about. Yes, I'm not talking about all the technical issues because those are irrelevant, and yes, you do know more about the technical aspects of the P4 than I do, but who the hell cares in this case? The fact is for the MHz increase, the performance is not there with the P4-M.



    [ 03-05-2002: Message edited by: Tarbash ]</p>
  • Reply 53 of 70
    [quote]but I'M TALKING ABOUT THE P4-M, NOT NORTHWOOD!!

    <hr></blockquote>



    Oops! <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />

    Sorry, My Bad. :o



    Please Accept my appologies. I thought you were talking about something else.
  • Reply 54 of 70
    agou9agou9 Posts: 13member
    Tarbash,



    The P3-M sits on the Tualatitan (sp?) core and the P4M is basically a 1.7 GHz NW (512K on-die L2)with better power management. Both processors are manufactured on Intel's 0.13um process with copper interconnects (finally).



    Is the P3-M close to the the 1.7 GHz P4-M in some cases? Sure, especially on older non SSE/SSE2 code that requires more FP ops. As I understand it, the P4 architecture is pretty week when it comes to FP unless SSE2 is taken advantage of. Also, as most everyone and their cousin knows by now, the P3 has a higher IPC than the P4. So yeah, in some areas the MHz rating for the P4 looks like a lot of fluff, but in some others (have you seen typical Quake3 benches for the P4?--I'm sure you have) the P4 smokes.
  • Reply 55 of 70
    macaddictmacaddict Posts: 1,055member
    [quote]Radar: Put a single 512 chip in the config instead of 2 256's, add the top end 15 inch display, video software package, and all the trimmings and you've got a much higher price than $2900.<hr></blockquote>



    Put the most expensive screen in? Most expensive RAM? Considering the TiBook ships with either of those options standard, I don't think that's the best way to compare.



    Movie Package? Okay, whatever. Add $70. All the trimmings? Like...?



    [ 03-06-2002: Message edited by: radar1503 ]</p>
  • Reply 56 of 70
    spartspart Posts: 2,060member
    [quote]Originally posted by radar1503:

    <strong>



    Put the most expensive screen in? Most expensive RAM? Considering the TiBook ships with either of those options standard, I don't think that's the best way to compare.



    Movie Package? Okay, whatever. Add $70. All the trimmings? Like...?



    [ 03-06-2002: Message edited by: radar1503 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Dude, if you want to do a comparison, you have to make it equivalent to the TiBook, who gives a sh!t if it doesn't come standard, and by all the trimmings he probably means all the stuff the PBG4 has (at least that is avail on a PC). Get WinXP Pro too, has more of the features of Mac OS X. XP Home is a ripoff, then again so is Pro but its SLIGHTLY better.
  • Reply 57 of 70
    You can't make an equivalent comparison since the processor, memory subsystem and graphics acceleration on the Dell are far ahead of the TiBook.
  • Reply 58 of 70
    macaddictmacaddict Posts: 1,055member
    [quote]Dude, if you want to do a comparison, you have to make it equivalent to the TiBook, who gives a sh!t if it doesn't come standard, and by all the trimmings he probably means all the stuff the PBG4 has (at least that is avail on a PC). <hr></blockquote>



    Yeah. That would not include a 1600 x 1200 screen or one 512MB DIMM instead of two.



    [quote]Get WinXP Pro too, has more of the features of Mac OS X.<hr></blockquote>



    I can honestly say I do not know much about the advantages of XP Pro. What does it offer over XP Home that makes it more comparable to OS X?
  • Reply 59 of 70
    tarbashtarbash Posts: 278member
    OK, here is the Dell:



    P4-M 1.7 GHz

    15 inch enhanced UXGA display

    512 MB RAM (1 DIMM)

    30 GB HD

    32 MB nVidia GF2Go

    XP Pro

    Combo drive

    Wireless card

    Dell Movie Studio ( <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> )



    Total: $3787



    PowerBook G4

    667 MHz G4

    15.2 inch widescreen display

    512 MB RAM (1 DIMM)

    30 GB HD

    16 MB Radeon Mobility

    Mac OS X 10.1.3

    Combo Drive

    Wireless card

    iMovie, iTunes, iPhoto, PC Calc, etc. *(the new software bundle)



    Total: $3099



    While the PowerBook may not have the leading memory subsystem, nor processor, it's not very far behind in terms of real world performance, especially in Photoshop. Plus you also have to take the overall design and weight into account as well. The Dell weighing almost 8 lbs, the PowerBook 5.4 lbs., 1 inch thick, etc.



    For 3D games, yeah, the 32 MB Gf2Go is going to beat the 16 MB Radeon, but personally, I am going to be doing WORK instead of being non-productive and playing games. Plus, even if I do want to play some games, the Radeon isn't THAT bad for a laptop.



    Is the Dell really worth almost $700 more? I don't think so.



    And this is compared to a 5 month old Apple system. Just wait until the new PowerBooks come out...







    [ 03-07-2002: Message edited by: Tarbash ]</p>
  • Reply 60 of 70
    agou9agou9 Posts: 13member
    <a href="http://www.csd.toshiba.com/cgi-bin/tais/pc/[email protected]@@@0447303732.1015 [email protected]@@@&BV_EngineID=gadcdhcihemfbfekcghcfmfdglj .0&comm=ST&plin=Portables&pfam=Satellite&poid=2075 13&Adoid=140598" target="_blank">This</a>Toshiba seems like a better deal.



    Processor : Mobile Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor-M featuring Enhanced Intel SpeedStep technology

    Processor Speed : 1700MHz

    Memory : 512MB SDRAM

    Display Type : UXGA Active Matrix (1600 x 1200)

    Display Size : 15"

    Graphics : NVIDIA GeForce4 440Go graphics controller w/32MB DDR external VRAM video memory

    Hard Drive : 40 Gigabyte

    Multimedia : DVD/CD-RW multifunction drive

    Design : All-in-One

    Modem : Integrated V.90/56K modem

    Networking : Integrated 10/100 Ethernet

    Operating System : Windows® XP Home Edition

    Additional Software : FreedomWare, and Toshiba Great Software Offer

    Dimensions : 13.0” x 11.6” x 1.8”

    Weight : 7.05lbs

    Warranty : 1 year parts and labor, 1 year battery

    FireWire : i.Link (IEEE 1394) port

    Price : $2499
Sign In or Register to comment.