mubs said:
Is there a significant difference between the following processors for a notebook for general average use? The buyer is verrrry price sensitive. Listed in alpha order:
Core Duo
Core Solo
Mobile Sempron
Pentium-M
Turion 64 Mobile
Core Solo is the best overall mobile processor, only because Core Duo isn't going to give you much for the cost difference.
Power consumption on all the Core Solos is incredibly good -- especially the ultra-low-voltage models -- and the performance is better than you might think.
By no later than October of 2007, excellent dirt cheap Core Solo notebook computers will be common. A mid-range Core Solo notebook with a 120 GB SATA hard drive using perpendicular recording technology, DVD+-R/W, 1 GB of DDR2, 16- or 17-inch LCD, and a big battery for 6~7 (or more) hour operation will be the ideal base model system.
Core Duo "Yonah" (32-bit dual-core mobile)
Model# Clock GHz FSB MHz Watts L2 Cache
T2700 2.33 667 31 2MB
T2600 2.16 667 31 2MB
T2500 2.00 667 31 2MB
T2400 1.83 667 31 2MB
T2300 1.66 667 31 2MB
L2400 1.66 667 15 2MB
L2300 1.50 667 15 2MB
U2500 1.20 533 9 2MB
Core Solo "Yonah" (32-bit single-core mobile)
Model# Clock GHz FSB MHz Watts L2 Cache
T1400 1.83 667 27 2MB
T1300 1.66 667 27 2MB
U1400 1.20 533 5 2MB
U1300 1.06 533 5 2MB
The mobile Core2 (64-bit Solo and Duo variants) called "Merom" won't be available for several more weeks. Core"1" processors use a bit less power than Core2, but Core2 is plenty faster.