Duo Core vs Turion 64 X2 TL-60. Will lower voltage win the day vs performance?

[Eastcoasthandle]

OH BOY, looks like we may have some serious competition from AMD in the near future. If they are able to produce a Turion 64 X2 TL-60, 2.0GHz @ 1.075V which produces very little heat and still stay in the ball park of Core Duo T2500 @ 2.0 Ghz @ 1.325V the potential is down right scary. Although the T2500 comes out ahead in nearly all the benchmarks that's not the angle I see the potential.
-Lower heat potential
-Lower consumption used vs. some P4s
-Combining 2 or more Turion 64 X2 TL-60 together for a dual or quad CPU

The real threat to this Turion64 X2 TL-60 is if they combined these into a dual or quad CPU and put it in a desktop. Then the potential when it's overclocked can be a monster! If Intel or AMD produce performance CPUs at 1.0V @ 2.0GHz clock speed the better the potential.
read the link found here (http://www.hardspell.com/news/showcont.asp?news_id=25568)

My thinking is simple, if I owned a famous CPU company I would make the order simple for my engineers. "Make me a 2.0GHz CPU that can run at 1.0V under load that performs better then a P4 950. And, when OC'd under load only reach 1.50V at its max OC frequency". The performance gained per clock cycle should be at least double that of any OC'd CPU on the market, (if the material used is not specifically designed for 1.0V use only) IMO.

[Lestat]

from what i read of the Turion it was nice but had a ways to go to even come close to the Core Duo.

the real question becomes this.

Today we are in the age of 1000w power supplies, Quad SLI, and Crossfire.
Multiple hard drives and sound cards that are even becoming more power hungry.
For years Intel, and yes AMD have had the technology to create CPU's which are lower power and high yiled for desktops and yet they continually produce more and more and more power hungry cpu's which are scalling less and less when compared the the previous cpu's, and in terms of laptop vs desktop, the laptop market has made massive leaps in power consumption and processing power and yet, as i stated desktop cpu's have only gotten more power hungry and less spectacular on the processing side of things.

We know that companies such as intel and amd cant just throw any ol new technology out into the market any time they feel like it. It would turn the market on its head and only hurt them. just the way PCI-Express did at first, only it was time for a new video card interface, only PCI-Express is still pretty lackluster in my eyes.

The Core Duo and Core 2 Duo are now prepping the market to take the next step in CPU evolution. Low power and incredibly high processing power.
A step that could of and should of been made when the AMD64 was first introduced.

Right now we are going backwards in the mhz race, not falling behind but leaping ahead with less mhz, and honestly i would love to see how low of Ghz it takes to make a Core 2 Duo or Core Duo to run neck and neck with some of the current stock cpu's out there.

test test test until you find that sweet spot where it runs neck and neck....

anyways.. i have never understood why they make laptop cpu's the way they do and then turn around and make desktop cpu's the way they do.. way too much power and heat and the performance just isnt there as it is for a laptop on a mhz basis
lets hope the core 2 duo brings everyone into a new era
the turion, i guess we will have to wait and see but as stated, from what i read, it didnt have nearly the ponies under the hood as the core duo.

[savantu]

OH BOY, looks like we may have some serious competition from AMD in the near future. If they are able to produce a Turion 64 X2 TL-60, 2.0GHz @ 1.075V which produces very little heat and still stay in the ball park of Core Duo T2500 @ 2.0 Ghz @ 1.325V the potential is down right scary. Although the T2500 comes out ahead in nearly all the benchmarks that's not the angle I see the potential.
-lower heat
-lower wattage that can still beat most P4s
...

Those are 2 very wrong arguments.I don't know what you've studied but voltage != wattage.Core Duo has a familly 31w TDP while the Turion X2 2GHz has a 35w TDP.

The T2500 is cooler and lower heat ( I repeat myself ) and higher performance than a 2GHz Turion X2. :slapass:

[Nazu]

Yep and when Merom comes out it will deffinitly kick turions ass :slapass:

[Staucher]

in the test Here (http://www.hardspell.com/news/showcont.asp?news_id=25568) is the Core DUO faster to TL-60 whose the Problem?

[Eastcoasthandle]

Staucher, savantu & Nazu Wrong, wrong, wrong again, if you read my statement it clearly stated "Although the T2500 comes out ahead in nearly all the benchmarks that's not the angle I see the potential."
This TL-60 reminds me of the potential I recall seeing from the M when it first came out. And, just like the M I saw that it could be used as a template for better CPUs. I also believe that the TL-60 maybe used as a template for future AMD cpus.

[Nazu]

Staucher, savantu & Nazu Wrong, wrong, wrong again, if you read my statement it clearly stated "Although the T2500 comes out ahead in nearly all the benchmarks that's not the angle I see the potential."
This TL-60 reminds me of the potential I recall seeing from the M when it first came out. And, just like the M I saw that it could be used as a template for better CPUs. I also believe that the TL-60 maybe used as a template for future AMD cpus.
Do you know that turion is based on the normal a64 architecture? Pentium M was totally different architecture than Pentium 4. Theres not that much difference in normal s754 A64 and in Turion, rather than Pentium M which is based on the Pentium 3 and and Pentium 4 which is all different Netburst architecture.

[mjp1618]

Eastcoasthandle, I really don't understand why you are soooo excited by the Turion, which performs worse clock-for-clock, consumes more power, and would soon cost more than the Core Duo.

Can you please explain why you think "TL-60 maybe used as a template for future AMD cpus" and what potential you mean?

[Eastcoasthandle]

Nazu & mjp1618 look, this is not up for debate nor does my opinion need further explanation for you. It is what it is, if you don't agree with it then your only course is to move on. I am not emotional charged, that I need to argue with you regarding my opinion.

[Kjaks]

The AMD TDP is the theoretical MAX power consumption.
The Intel TDP is the practical MAX prower consumption.

That means the AMD TDP practical MAX prower consumption most likely will be lower than the Intel 31W TDP.

But Merom has shown to perform 20% better than Core Duo clock by clock, when we allready know that Core Duo performs better than Turion X2 clock by clock. When it comes to battery lifetime in a Turion X2 laptop vs Core Duo Yonah/Core 2 Duo Merom laptop there will be a close match.

[Fred_Pohl]

The AMD TDP is the theoretical MAX power consumption.
The Intel TDP is the practical MAX prower consumption.

I've heard that claim many times but with a lot of review sites now measuring actual system power consumption, it doesn't seem to hold water.

Here's just one example: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2725

130W TDP 965EE @3.73G = 206W full load

110W TDP FX60 @2.6G = 192W full load

Bearing in mind that the 965EE system includes the northbridge, that would mean that both cpus draw about the same watts.

[Fred_Pohl]

OH BOY, looks like we may have some serious competition from AMD in the near future. If they are able to produce a Turion 64 X2 TL-60, 2.0GHz @ 1.075V which produces very little heat and still stay in the ball park of Core Duo T2500 @ 2.0 Ghz @ 1.325V the potential is down right scary. Although the T2500 comes out ahead in nearly all the benchmarks that's not the angle I see the potential.
-lower heat
-lower wattage that can still beat most P4s
-Combined 2 Turion 64 X2 TL-60together or even 4 of then in a quad what are the possibilities then?

The real threat to this Turion64 X2 TL-60 is if they combined these into a dual or quad CPU and put it in a desktop. Then the potential when it's overclocked can be a monster! The better Intel/AMD produces decent performing CPU at or near 1V the better the potential it will perform when its overclocked.
read the link (http://www.hardspell.com/news/showcont.asp?news_id=25568)

My thinking is simple, if I owned a famous CPU company I would make the order simple for my engineers. "Make me a 2.0 CPU that can run at 1.0V and perform better then a P4 950. Nothing to difficult and nothing that can't be done. Although at initial clock it wouldn't beat a Conroe. But when you OC it the gains per clock cycle can double/triple that of Conroe, IMO.

I must be missing something... Turion 64 X2's lower performance and higher power consumption than Core Duo is a good thing? I guess it will be even better in comparison to Merom then? :rolleyes:

[kl0012]

The AMD TDP is the theoretical MAX power consumption.
The Intel TDP is the practical MAX prower consumption.

So how do you explain, that Yonah processors with the different frequency do have identical TDP? Well, here is the measurements of the actual consumption:
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article313-page5.html

[savantu]

Yonah uses a familly TDP , 31w.

That doesn't mean the chip actually uses 31w , in fact this summer we will see a 2.33GHz Yonah with the same 31w TDP.

As for AMD , between 1.8GHz and 2GHz the TDP jumped from 33 to 35w which indicates that 35w is actual max power consumption.

[TarTheDark]

T2600 Power Consumption Test:

Idle: 6W (2W with EIST)

Full Load: 24W

Source: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/mainboards/display/asus-n4lvm-dh_16.html

[ORCBEAST]

Then I read theres also the single core 5W TDP made by Intel 1.2-1.3Ghz Ultra Low voltage.

U can imagine how much that one uses in idle :p:

I was a little off found some info:


Intel has quietly introduced a pair of 'Yonah'-based ultra-low voltage processors, both of which are believed to consume no more than 5.5W, but contain only one processing core and run over a reduced 533MHz frontside bus.

The two ULV CPUs - as predicted - are the 1.06GHz U1300 and the 1.2GHz U1400. Both ships support Extended SpeedStep to provide deeper sleep states and lower power consumption. Each has 2MB of L2 cache and is fabbed at 65nm

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/20/intel_ships_5-5w_core_solo_ulvs/

I dont know if Intel updated the spec as this was printed on 20th April.

[Fred_Pohl]

So how do you explain, that Yonah processors with the different frequency do have identical TDP? Well, here is the measurements of the actual consumption:
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article313-page5.html

Both Intel and AMD use family TDPs that cover a range of processor models at different clock speeds. The TDP is based on the highest clocked cpu they intend to release in that family.

I don't see anything compelling in your link. T2600 using less than half the watts of a slower X2-3800+ isn't bad and you shouldn't really compare a single core Turion to a Core Duo.

[StealthyFish]

you also realize that Intel has 65nm, 45nm coming soon, and 32nm projected in 2009. Smaller the architecture, less power is required. For Intel, that processor is currently a 65nm architecture, so it consumes less power than it's Northwood, prescott, smithfield counterparts.

Lol, and talk about a four core processor sounds kind of.... well, a little over the top. From what you're saying, since they can make a processor run off that much power, they can put four cores into one processor die? If that's the case, Intel could well do the same thing, putting another 2 cores into the core duo (lol, quad duo). I doubt AMD has the resources to put that all together and try to market it out. Even if you aren't referring to making a quad core processor, you could very well make two of the yonah's out on one motherboard (if you can find a manufacturer). And when you place them into desktops, I don't believe you really have to worry about power consumption as you would with a laptop (where battery power consumption is something that hardware designers have to take into fact).

Intel can make more performance with less power consumption with the manufacturering process (65nm). TL-60 might be something good, but it will be in the shadow of Merom.

[NapalmV5]

no turion X2 on s939? wonderfoe!

[Ossprey]

Just a thing about the Turion 64 X2 TL-60 or any of the Turions for that matter is that they are ALL 64 Bit so are "Vista Ready" unlike the Intel Core Duo CPU's that are only 32 bit.

So those of us that plan to upgrade to Vista at the end of the Year or are using LINUX the Core CPU's are kind of pointless as only the older 32 bit software will run on them.

And as for processing power under a 64 bit App you get double the bandwidth of a 32 bit App and for this reason a 64 bit CPU will land up running Cooler in the end as more instructions are done per clock.

There is a reason why AMD's are still the gamers choice and no overheated over clocked Intel can change that

Intel should have released the 64 bit core to compete with the Turions but are losing more market share due to it.

I was looking at actually buying one of the CORE DUO but due to its 32 bit nature I've decided to match my desktop and go 64 bit.

Until Intel finally realize 64 bit is the future I'm sticking by my AMD 64

[alexio]

Core 2 Duo is 64bit :rolleyes:

[savantu]

...

And as for processing power under a 64 bit App you get double the bandwidth of a 32 bit App and for this reason a 64 bit CPU will land up running Cooler in the end as more instructions are done per clock.

...

I'm impressed by your technical knowledge. ;)

As for the rest of your comments they are as good as the above one.

[Greenhead]

Until Intel finally realize 64 bit is the future I'm sticking by my AMD 64

64 bit computer has been around for a while, but we still see very little development at the software level. There is very few applications in today's market that actually needs 64 bit extensions, (unless your program will actually has the need/ability to address more than 2 gigs of ram, which is extremely rare)
until the software NEEDS 64 bit extensions. 32 bit processors are just fine.

[Vric]

Just a thing about the Turion 64 X2 TL-60 or any of the Turions for that matter is that they are ALL 64 Bit so are "Vista Ready" unlike the Intel Core Duo CPU's that are only 32 bit.

Vista have 2 version, on 64bit and one 32bit.

64bit didn't proved anything yet. It's not faster, it's even slower in some aera.

This post is the best AMD fanboy one I have seen in weeks.

"I will get a slower cpu because it's 64bit"... You were probably the type of guy to get a Cirix CPU 10 years ago because it had few more goodies over the 486/P1 (but was damn slower). :stick: :p:

[Kjaks]

Voltage is not the only factor that has something to say for the total wattage. Ampere is also one. Turion X2 can run on lower volts and higher ampere and still have the same or higher TDP than Core Duo.

[savantu]

Voltage is not the only factor that has something to say for the total wattage. Ampere is also one. Turion X2 can run on lower volts and higher ampere and still have the same or higher TDP than Core Duo.

Do you think he understands this ? ;)

[kiwi]

64bit didn't proved anything yet. It's not faster, it's even slower in some aera.



There are applications where 64bit vs 32bit is very noticable.

Just a few examples,
Rosetta @ home
openssl key generation (2-3 times!)

Just because we don't use them much and don't see 64bit benefits now, doesn't mean we won't see it in the near future. More and more appz will benefit from that

[Kjaks]

Do you think he understands this ? ;)
I don't know, but I tried my best..

[dogsx2]

There are applications where 64bit vs 32bit is very noticable.

Just a few examples,
Rosetta @ home
openssl key generation (2-3 times!)

Just because we don't use them much and don't see 64bit benefits now, doesn't mean we won't see it in the near future. More and more appz will benefit from that

When AMD 754 came out I jumped right on it not only because it was the fastest cpu then but also because it was 64bit ready and that was soon to be the coming thing. Was that 3 yrs ago already??? Until it's really out with drivers, why worry?? We will have gone thru a few more cpu's.:D

[Torin]

As someone said, Core 2 Duo supports 64-bit, so the issue is moot. However, very few (if anything of mention) things actually use 64-bit now, nevermind require it, so there is still little use for the 64-bit support. Maybe a couple years down the road it will matter, but considering that both Intel and AMD do it, arguing that 64-bit support for AMD chips is a reason to stay with AMD in light of Conroe, is just silly.