Intel's Expensive Mobile P4-M Disappoints
Posted by Mario Rodrigues
Date: March 22, 2002
ZDNet has reviewed two of the latest top of the range
Intel 1.7GHz P4-M notebooks from
Sony
and
Dell and has found performance to be disappointing for both models when
running mainstream productivity applications.
Business
Winstone 2001 was used to obtain these results. What was really surprising
in this test was that both machines were slower than an earlier Dell model that
was running an Intel 1.13GHz PIII-M processor. That's a 570MHz difference!
Shouldn't Intel be advertising a performance degradation warning? Performance
with content-creation applications was better than the PIII-M machine, but not
compelling. With the latest mobile graphics processors, both models gave
excellent graphics performance.
Other speed grades will be
available at 1.4GHz, 1.5GHz and 1.6GHz. It should be obvious why Intel launched
its P4-M at 1.7GHz. If Intel had launched with the 1.4GHz model, business
productivity performance would have deteriorated from being merely disappointing
to very poor which would have tarnished its launch. Those who buy notebooks for
business productivity performance should give these products a wide birth.
This is a deja vu, we've been here before with Intel's original desktop
P4. Do you remember? The
performance then
was pathetic and the asking price for systems was
outrageous.
With launch prices at $3000+ for these notebooks, history again repeats itself.
These notebooks are far too expensive for what they offer and cannot be
considered good value. Intel die-hards looking for "Intel value" should stick to
buying mobile PIII/Celeron models. Those looking for best performance or value
at lowest cost should take a look at AMD's mobile Duron and Athlon offerings.
Remember, AMD's multimode PowerNow power management technology is far superior
to Intel's double-mode SpeedStep. AMD's PowerNow will control a notebook's power
level automatically, dynamically changing the processor's frequency and voltage
many times a second in response to application load. This can increase battery
life by up to 30%. Intel's Enhanced SpeedStep can only change the frequency and
voltage between two states.
Beware, this is what
Intel is saying about its latest mobile product: "delivers the highest
notebook performance available." True when comparing frequency, untrue when
comparing the performance of mainstream productivity applications: "Offering a
unique combination of high-performance and lower power consumption." True when
compared to the desktop P4, but when compared to the mobile PIII, it has
inferior performance and power characteristics.
On this page, Intel claims that Microsoft's Office 2000 is optimized for the
P4-M. If this is so, then why does a 570MHz slower PIII-M run this application
quicker? Watch out for Intel blurb, you've been warned!
Intel needs to introduce its own PR nomenclature to accurately describe the real
performance of its P4 products. Adding an 'A' to the nomenclature does
distinguish a Willamette core from a Northwood, but true processor performance
is still not accurately described. Yes, this PR nomenclature would reflect a
lower number than the frequency speed of the processor. This would bring Intel
into line with AMD which would greatly help and benefit the consumer. As things
stand, unknowledgeable consumers who buy P4 systems would be very surprised to
find that performance in mainstream productivity applications, even with all the
extra megahertz, is inferior to an earlier generation PIII. A sobering thought
for consumers.
===================================
Pssst! We've updated our Shopping Page.
===================================