Quantcast Toshiba AMD Quad or i3? Which is better? - Page 2

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 75
  1. #11
    Notebook Evangelist
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Boalsburg, PA
    Posts
    366
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Re: Toshiba AMD Quad or i3? Which is better?

    When you say i5 wouldn't be on the same wavelength, do you mean it is waaay better or are you saying it is waaaay worse?
    Current Laptop:
    ASUS UL-50VT - Intel Centrino2 - 1.3Ghz - 4GB -Nvidia Geforce G210M - 512MB
    ______________________
    MALIBAL Lotus P151HM1
    | 15.6" 1920x1080 LED Backlit Matte | Intel Core i7 2630QM | NVIDIA GTX 560M 1.5GB DDR5| 8GB 1333MHz | 500GB HDD | 8X DVD Burner |Intel 6230 Advanced | IC Diamond 7 |

  2. #12
    Notebook Evangelist
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Boalsburg, PA
    Posts
    366
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Re: Toshiba AMD Quad or i3? Which is better?

    And if you ask me, the AMD looks better according to these benchmarks...

    PassMark - AMD A6-3400M APU with Radeon HD Graphics - Price performance comparison
    PassMark - Intel Core i3-2310M @ 2.10GHz - Price performance comparison

    Edit:
    And here is where the i5 lands you:
    PassMark - Intel Core i5-2410M @ 2.10GHz - Price performance comparison

    So as you can see, lightnica was in fact correct, the A6-3400 beats all.
    Current Laptop:
    ASUS UL-50VT - Intel Centrino2 - 1.3Ghz - 4GB -Nvidia Geforce G210M - 512MB
    ______________________
    MALIBAL Lotus P151HM1
    | 15.6" 1920x1080 LED Backlit Matte | Intel Core i7 2630QM | NVIDIA GTX 560M 1.5GB DDR5| 8GB 1333MHz | 500GB HDD | 8X DVD Burner |Intel 6230 Advanced | IC Diamond 7 |

  3. #13
    Cylon
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    735
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: Toshiba AMD Quad or i3? Which is better?

    Thank you Altered Phoenix. (I'd +rep you but apparently I can't at the moment.)

    So by passmark, the AMD A6-3400M quad core is considerably better than the i3 dual core and slightly better than the i5 dual core.

    I doubt the AMD A6-3400M would stand up against an i7, but we aren't comparing it to one.
    A gaming comparision of laptop graphics cards

    "Crucible" | Toshiba Satellite L300 | T3400 2.17GHz | 4GB DDR2 RAM | Win 7 Pro x64
    Intel GMA 4500M + nVidia GTX 550 eGPU w/Optimus | 1706 x 1066 (1280 x 800 native) glossy LCD
    500GB 7200RPM w/4GB SDD Hybrid HDD | DVD RW | Multitouch | 300Mbps Wireless N | USB 2.0

  4. #14
    Notebook Evangelist
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Boalsburg, PA
    Posts
    366
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Re: Toshiba AMD Quad or i3? Which is better?

    Quote Originally Posted by lightnica View Post
    I doubt the AMD A6-3400M would stand up against an i7, but we aren't comparing it to one.
    Nope but for the price of this laptop, that is a really nice cpu!
    Current Laptop:
    ASUS UL-50VT - Intel Centrino2 - 1.3Ghz - 4GB -Nvidia Geforce G210M - 512MB
    ______________________
    MALIBAL Lotus P151HM1
    | 15.6" 1920x1080 LED Backlit Matte | Intel Core i7 2630QM | NVIDIA GTX 560M 1.5GB DDR5| 8GB 1333MHz | 500GB HDD | 8X DVD Burner |Intel 6230 Advanced | IC Diamond 7 |

  5. #15
    Know Nothing
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,515
    Rep Power
    26

    Default Re: Toshiba AMD Quad or i3? Which is better?

    Quote Originally Posted by lightnica View Post
    Benchmarks please. (Preferably done by someone other than Intel.)
    AMD is cited to be similar to Core 2s/quads. This can't be news to you.

    SB is like 50% faster (more efficient?) than Core 2s per clock.

    Stop citing Passmark. They're terrible. Don't they have the 6770m listed as being twice as fast as the GTX 460m?

    EDIT:

    2.5 ghz i5 vs C2D

    http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-C...r.40106.0.html
    http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-C...r.25704.0.html

    Cinebench R10: Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit

    T9500 - 5441

    2540M - 9127.8

    64-bit 2540M - 11010.3

    50% more efficient, 25% turbo, sounds about right.

    EDIT2: The Llano thing:

    http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-A8-...w.57650.0.html

    The cores of the processor called 'Stars' have a maximum clock speed of 2.9 GHz, and have only been improved marginally since the desktop Athlon II and Phenom II. Due to this the performance per MHz and core is still comparable to the Core 2 Quad processors. Current Sandy Bridge quad-core CPUs are able to excel ahead significantly with the same clock speed, and thus the performance of a 2.5 GHz clocked Core i3-2100T is more or less on the same level as the A8-3850.

    Weaknesses become apparent during our benchmarks with the A8-3850, especially when it comes to the single-core benchmarks. The Cinebench R10 single-core test for example is only comparable to a Core i3-370M dual-core mobile processor with 2.4 GHz. SuperPi is known for not being an AMD favorite, and also the A8-3850 doesn't exactly show itself from its best side. Even the Core i5-520UM ULV mobile processor with 1.06-1.866 GHz is marginally faster.

    When all 4 cores are used the performance already looks significantly better. The results we determined with our benchmarks put the A8-3850 on a comparable level with the Core 2 Quad Q9550 with 2.83 GHz, or the Core i7-840QM with 1.86-3.2 GHz.
    Keep in mind this is a desktop processor, yet it's only really comparable to notebooks.

    And that's an A8 in question. We're talking about an A6. Yeah, but no. I think the entry level i5-2410m "might" be comparable to the top of the line A8-3850MX, but that's about it. That's what I mean by not on the same wavelength.

    EDIT3: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4444/a...apu-a8-3500m/9

    A8-3500m:

    Single - 2037

    i5-2410m:

    Single - 4495

    C2D T8100:

    Single - 2310 (32-bit, so score is lower than 64-bit tests from the previous)
    Last edited by Bill Nye; 23rd July 2011 at 07:11 PM.

  6. #16
    LOAD "*",8,1
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Wappingers Falls, NY
    Posts
    1,244
    Rep Power
    27

    Default Re: Toshiba AMD Quad or i3? Which is better?

    If you want to play games, buy the AMD. If you absolutely will never ever need to play any 3D games on it...buy the AMD anyway. The Core i3 doesn't stand a chance since it has no TurboBoost. An i5 on the other hand...
    Current: Samsung ATIV Book 8, with 250 GB Samsung 840 EVO (RAPID enabled), Centrino 7260 Dual-band, 16 GB RAM.


    Past Notebooks: Asus Q500A, Samsung Series 7 Chronos, Asus N53SV-B1 Xotic Custom, HP Probook 6545b, Compal HGL30, IBM Thinkpad X22, Dell Latitude D810, IBM Thinkpad T42p, HP Pavilion zd7000, Dell Inspriron 4100, Toshiba Satellite 335CDS, The ORIGINAL "Compaq" portable PC (yes, really). And before that I had the use of an Osborne 1.

  7. #17
    Notebook Evangelist
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Boalsburg, PA
    Posts
    366
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Re: Toshiba AMD Quad or i3? Which is better?

    Quote Originally Posted by 2hvy4grvty View Post
    Stop citing Passmark. They're terrible. Don't they have the 6770m listed as being twice as fast as the GTX 460m?
    No..... 6770 Ranked as 1454, 460m Ranked as 1208....

    Edit: That is place 73 vs place 58.
    Anyway you look at it, it is not twice as fast...
    Current Laptop:
    ASUS UL-50VT - Intel Centrino2 - 1.3Ghz - 4GB -Nvidia Geforce G210M - 512MB
    ______________________
    MALIBAL Lotus P151HM1
    | 15.6" 1920x1080 LED Backlit Matte | Intel Core i7 2630QM | NVIDIA GTX 560M 1.5GB DDR5| 8GB 1333MHz | 500GB HDD | 8X DVD Burner |Intel 6230 Advanced | IC Diamond 7 |

  8. #18
    Cylon
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    735
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: Toshiba AMD Quad or i3? Which is better?

    Quote Originally Posted by 2hvy4grvty View Post
    Per clock, AMD is cited to be similar to Core 2s/quads. This can't be news to you.

    SB is like 50% faster (more efficient?) than Core 2s per clock.
    Benchmarks and additional features. I don't do arbitrary comparisons.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2hvy4grvty View Post
    Stop citing Passmark. They're terrible. Don't they have the 6770m listed as being twice as fast as the GTX 460m?
    Then provide something you claim is better.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2hvy4grvty View Post
    EDIT:

    2.5 ghz i5 vs C2D

    Intel Core i5 2540M Notebook Processor - Notebookcheck.net Tech
    Intel Core 2 Duo T9500 Notebook Processor - Notebookcheck.net Tech

    Cinebench R10: Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit

    T9500 - 5441

    2540M - 9127.8

    64-bit 2540M - 11010.3
    Your missing something very, very important - a benchmark for the AMD A6. Without that any comparison is useless.
    A gaming comparision of laptop graphics cards

    "Crucible" | Toshiba Satellite L300 | T3400 2.17GHz | 4GB DDR2 RAM | Win 7 Pro x64
    Intel GMA 4500M + nVidia GTX 550 eGPU w/Optimus | 1706 x 1066 (1280 x 800 native) glossy LCD
    500GB 7200RPM w/4GB SDD Hybrid HDD | DVD RW | Multitouch | 300Mbps Wireless N | USB 2.0

  9. #19
    Know Nothing
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,515
    Rep Power
    26

    Default Re: Toshiba AMD Quad or i3? Which is better?

    Edited with comparison to an A8. The AMD's "advantage" is in the two extra cores, but even in multi-threaded benchmarks, it's 50% slower than the 2520m.

    If we step down from the A8 to an A6, that would only increase. But then again, the comparison is with an 2410m, which should bring us back to square one - A6 and the i5-2410m are not on the same wavelength.

    @altered phoenix: That's terrible still. The 460m is 30-35% faster than the 6770m. They have it listed at a 15% skew the other way. That's over a 50% discrepancy from real world tests... that's HORRIBLE for a synthetic benchmark.

  10. #20
    Cylon
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    735
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Re: Toshiba AMD Quad or i3? Which is better?

    Keep in mind this is a desktop processor, yet it's only really comparable to notebooks.

    And that's an A8 in question. We're talking about an A6. Yeah, but no. I think the entry level i5-2410m "might" be comparable to the top of the line A8-3850MX, but that's about it. That's what I mean by not on the same wavelength.
    OK, step in the right direction.

    One benchmark is actual mentioned in the article. In this one benchmark the desktop A8 is found to be worse than a mobile i3 at a single threaded task. It wouldn't be far fetched to suggest that the laptop A6 would also be worse in this one single threaded benchmark than the same mobile i3.

    This is only one single threaded benchmark however. Judging a quad core by single core performance seems rather unfair, that's not what the chip was designed for.

    There should be more benchmarks listed here (Mobile Processors - Benchmarklist - Notebookcheck.net Tech) but apparently notebookcheck is too lazy...
    A gaming comparision of laptop graphics cards

    "Crucible" | Toshiba Satellite L300 | T3400 2.17GHz | 4GB DDR2 RAM | Win 7 Pro x64
    Intel GMA 4500M + nVidia GTX 550 eGPU w/Optimus | 1706 x 1066 (1280 x 800 native) glossy LCD
    500GB 7200RPM w/4GB SDD Hybrid HDD | DVD RW | Multitouch | 300Mbps Wireless N | USB 2.0

 

 
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:03 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2
Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1