AMD Turion X2 vs. Intel Core 2 Duo

[weeeee]

I know Intel has a faster processor and AMD is a slightly better power saver but what other factors come into play?

[usapatriot]

The Intel Core 2 Duo at the moment is better, it saves a bit more power, is more efficient and performs better.

[Zero]

Thats probably about it. Power and performance are the main focus of mobile processors. Intel has a very good processor, with it able to consume very little power and still running very fast when it needs to. AMD also have a very good processor, but their main advantage is the price. Generally, they tend to be less.

Performance wise, the Intel will perform slightly faster as you have said, but that is not to say the AMD isn't good. The Intel will also be slighly better power wise. The architecture of the Core 2 Duo is more efficient than the Turion X2, and so, it will decrease the power consumption. However, it depends on the rest of the system. For example, the Intel could be paired with a very powerful graphics card, that would use a lot of power and thus, reduce the overall battery life.

[Rahul]

In general, the C2D should be better in almost every aspect but will also cost more as well than the Turion. I'd recommend the C2D, excellent processor.

[Techdabbler]

Kind of a followup question on this:

Does the performance comparison apply to exectution of 64 bit code? Is the Core 2 a better performer with that as well?

(Also a confirmation - I've heard the Core Duo is 32 bit only while Core 2 Duo is both 32 and 64. Can anyone confirm that? Intel always seems a bit shy talking about 64 bit...)

[Jalf]

I haven't seen more than one or two benchmarks of 64-bit performance, but what I've seen indicates that the performance gap is a lot smaller in 64-bit mode. The C2D is still faster, but it no longer slaughters the Turion/Athlon64.

From what I've seen, C2D performs about the same in 32 and 64 bit mode, while Athlon 64 is faster in 64 than 32.

And yeah, you're right, Core is 32 bit only. Core 2 is 64 bit as well.