The Test

For this review we used FIC's Centrino for our Pentium-M 1.5GHz system, and the IBM T40P for the 1.60GHz Pentium-M system.

Windows XP Professional Test System

 

Hardware
 
Dell Latitude D800
FIC Centrino IBM T40 IBM T40P
Desktop System
CPU(s)
Pentium M 1.6GHz
Pentium M 1.5GHz
Pentium M 1.5GHz
Pentium M 1.6GHz
Pentium 4 2.4GHz
Motherboard(s)
Dell 855PM
FIC 855PM
IBM 855PM
IBM 855PM
Intel D845EBT 845E
Memory
512MB PC2100
512MB PC2100
256MB PC2100
512MB PC2100
512MB PC2100
Hard Drive
40GB 5400RPM
30GB 4200RPM
40GB 5400RPM
40GB 5400RPM
IBM Deskstar DPTA-372050 20.5GB 7200 RPM
CDROM
CD-RW/DVD
CD-RW/DVD
CD-RW/DVD
CD-RW/DVD
Philips 48X
Video Card(s)
NVIDIA GeForce4 4200 Go 64MB DDR
Integrated 855PM
ATI Mobility Radeon 7500
ATI Mobility FireGL 9000 64MB DDR
ATI Radeon 9000 Pro 64MB
NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4200 128MB
Ethernet
Onboard Intel Gigabit
Onboard Intel Pro/100VE
Onboard Intel Gigabit
Onboard Intel Gigabit
Linksys LNE100TX 100Mbit PCI Ethernet Adapter

 

Software

Operating System

Windows XP Professional SP1

Video Drivers
NVIDIA 42.56
(latest available for Dell)
Intel 6.13.01.3460
ATI 6.13.10.6278
(latest available for IBM)
ATI 7.79.7.3 (latest available for IBM)
ATI Catalyst 3.1
NVIDIA 41.09

 

Benchmarking Applications
 

Bapco SysMark 2002
ZDM Content Creation Winstone 2003
ZDM Business Winstone 2002

Pricing Content Creation Performance
Comments Locked

8 Comments

View All Comments

  • zigCorsair - Wednesday, July 14, 2004 - link

    I thought it was a very informative article. Of course, I'll be upset if it's biased, but being a master's student in CS, many of the exact details I was looking for were in here, and for that I say thank you.
  • Zebo - Monday, May 10, 2004 - link

    I don't see whats so impressive. An athlon mobile 2600/2800 xp 35W version, which runs ~2000Mhz will kill these. To little to late.
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - link

    how the hell could this be a balanced and informative article when in their own analysis they ignored their own data?

    There is no mention of the anamolous nature of the BAPCO test..absolutely NOTHING...

    Its enough for me to question the competency of this site...and even to the point where I suspect that certain unethical compromises have been made.
  • Anonymous User - Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - link

    Yeah, I agree with Sprockkets... same reason Athlon XP loses to the P4 in this benchmark... someone was trying to make the P4 look better, and everything else look worse. Now all the sudden, this new great CPU is getting it's but kicked because of all the P4 optimizations (and probably non-P4 deoptomizations).
  • sprockkets - Tuesday, September 9, 2003 - link

    I wonder why the P4 trashes the PM on Content Creation Performance and nothing else? Maybe it's the stupid skewing toward the P4. Why else would it lose here and kick butt everywhere else? www.theinquirer.net has an article which brought this to readers attention.
  • Anonymous User - Thursday, August 21, 2003 - link

    "Without a trace cache, the design team was forced to develop a more accurate branch predictor unit for the Banias core. Although beyond the scope of this article, Banias was outfitted with a branch predictor significantly superior to what was in the Pentium III. The end result was a reduction of mispredicted branches by around 20%."

    Wouldn't he mean that the branch predictor was superior to the P4?
  • Anonymous User - Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - link

    looks good
  • Anonymous User - Friday, August 8, 2003 - link

    An outstanding well balanced article, after this read I feel I really know about Centrino. Thanks

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now