A quick question for the technically oriented. At this stage, which is the better processor for a notebook computer, an Intel dual core 32-bit processor or an AMD 64-bit processor, all else being equal? As I understand it, the upcoming Microsoft operating system will be a 64-bit operating system. Not surprisingly, someone told me that AMD's 64-bit Turion processor is more suitable for this software than Intel's 32-bit processors. On the other hand, someone else has suggested that 64-bit processors run way too hot and that this is particularly disadvantageous for a notebook computer. He said that Intel decided to circumvent the heat/stress issue in achieving higher clock speeds and performance levels by introducing the dual core processor rather than going 64-bit. According to him, a single core 64 is no better. Since I have no idea who is right, I was hoping some of the more technically knowledgeable among us would weigh in with their opinions.
Avoid spending lots of money on unproven technologies, especially in portables. Why shoot for these outlandish requirements if a cheap AMD 3200MHz Sempron or perhaps Turion might do? I got two Fujitsu's running on these and can't see any need for more power in a portable for realtime trading applications. Further, why banking on that stillborn M$ 64bit newcomer? You remember those users still running happily win2K without ever touching XP with all the SP mess and registration hullabaloo? If you want to make market money from a portable: KISS. nononsense
Practically speaking, the core duo is better. 64bit gets you a bigger memory space but unless you think you'll need to be using greater than 4GB in the next 2 years, responsiveness from 2 processors is better for day to day activity.
If you can wait until late fall to buy a laptop, intel will release the Merom chips which will be 64bit core duo. I'm waiting until next spring for the merom and "santa rosa" chipset. It'll sport an 800mhz front side bus among other features.
Thank you for the responses thus far. I started another thread a few months ago when I started to think about upgrading my computer. It has been on its "last legs" for a while now. I was looking at a Dell 9300, however, I have been putting off the purchase because my current machine has been "sufficing." However, my annual subscription to eSignal expires in early July, and I plan to switch to another vendor. I want to go in with a new machine. The one I am looking at is the following: http://configure.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=ca&CS=CADHS1&l=en&OC=OCINSP9402_FEAT_E2 Please bear in mind that this is in Canadian Dollars. The reason I started this thread is because I visited a nearby Best Buy and was told about the 64-bit processor, as mentioned in my first post. Any thoughts about the Dell? I am well aware of the obsolescence factor associated with computer equipment. However, I don't want to buy something that is almost immediately technically obsolete, and functionally obsolete within about 3 years or so.
The additional processing power of the dual core will probably fall short of your expectations in its initial development. There are some issues happening in the laptop development that are proving to be a little more troublesome than expected (one being heat). Having been in this field now for over 17 years, I'd tell you that I think you should allow them about a year to work through some of the initial known (and unknown) issues.
If the core duo performs as well as desktop version, I wouldn't hesitate to buy it for an instance. I have a Dell 9150 and the performance has been outstanding especially when running multiple IO intensive apps. Dell is pretty solid. They are so many deals on FatWallet. I would not buy until I went over the deals listed on FW forums. The E1505 was well under a thousand. I believe even the E1705 was about a tho or less. FatWallet Hot Deals