So if Intel does not release a 3 core part you can be sure that top of the list the i7 quad core will come and after that the x4's from AMD and not the i3/i5.I can confirm with TitanStats that this indeed works. Hum not so sure about i3/i5 changing the game, most i3's and i5's "mobile" will perform around the x3's and i am sure that the x4's will beat them "multi thread only" If you want dual cores the Phenom II N620 will most likely be around the performance of most i3's and i5's given the 400mhz - 500mhz advantage the AMD chip has. I'm terrified of seeing what a CULV i3/i5 could do (if Intel decides to sell something along this line). Then again, everything will likely change with moble i3/i5. Intel's CULV line of processors draw something like 10W of power, and are still faster than many AMD mobile CPUs.ĪMD will continue to get slaughtered in this segment unless they push out a low power CPU than can still perform around where the current Core 2 Duos perform at. The mobile Core 2 Duo line is fast, and have a higher power draw to performance ratio compared to AMD's lineup. You rarely, if ever, find AMD laptops that get better battery life than a similar Intel laptop. I'd say what AMD needs is CPUs that draw significantly less power. ULV processors are taking over and high end mobile chips are becoming less and less popular and thus, less profitable. It too bad that these chips did not come out sooner those. I hope these rock hard because this is the segment AMD is getting most butchered in. If true then these Phenom II's may be based on propus rather than deneb.ĪMD needs much faster chips in the mobile space. Kk still AMD's case is MAX and Intels case is AVG, this is in it self very different values even for the same chip "MAX vs AVG"ĭepends on the review I guess, xbitlabs got a bigger difference here ().īut looking at the power consumption difference with the desktop parts it becomes rather clear why AMD choose to cut the 元 on the mobile chips. :)īE on notebook front is nice, it keeps the XE in check. Nice to see a move on the mobile quad front, maybe leads to bit price preasure for intel there. (from the older xeon design guides since there it is written clearer)īoth companies use now applications to determin TDP, and both can be Topic The Thermal Monitor can protect the processors in rare workload excursions This data set is then used to derive the TDP targets published in the processorsĭatasheet. Thermal environment to determine their sensitivity to activation of the thermal controlĬircuit. These applications are then evaluated in a controlled This data set is used to determine those applications that are interestingįrom a power perspective. Measurements of processor power consumption while running various high powerĪpplications. TDP is not the maximum power that the processor can dissipate. TDP should be used for processor thermal solution design targets.
TheĬonstraining conditions for TDP are specified in the notes in the thermal and power tables The thermal design power is the maximum power a processor canĭraw for a thermally significant period while running commercially useful software. Sry but thats not true anymore, just go to amd/intel and see what they write about TDP and how it is defined: To be clear AMD's TDP is not really possible to achive in normal day to day activities and Intels TDP is totally achievable and can even be exceeded. AMD's TDP means MAX a CPU can draw where as Intels TDP is avg of the measures taken in some tests.