Benchmarks are in and.....

Pentium M and Celeron M mop the floor with the C7-M from VIA.

I have the Samsung Q1p (pentioum 1ghz version) and have ran some benchmarks and compared it to a VIA C7-M.

Turns out the Pentium M 1ghz give TWICE the performance of the Via C7-m 1ghz.

Celeron M 900mhz in the original samsung Q1 scores just below the pentium due to the 100mhz clock difference. Clock for Clock there is little to no difference between performace of the Celeron M and Peniutm M. This is because they are the EXACT same chip, Celeron Ms just have 512kb L2 cache enabled. Cache size has been proven to offer little to no performance increase with the CeleronM/PeniumM mobile line of CPUs and this is just another example. The only benefit pentium M chip give is SpeedStep and this has been proven many many times for you nonbelievers. Its laughable how people think Pentium M chips are faster than Celeron Ms. lol. Too funny. Anyway....

I will post pictures of the results soon. Yes I know the VIA C7 will offer lower power but the utter lack of performance is NOT worth it.

Hi.

What does 'TWICE the performance' mean though? In some cases the INtel chip is many times better. In others its not so good.

The big question for VIA-based UMPCs is whether Vista supports the MPEG/WMV hardware decoding available. If not, its going to be a slow video performer. In XP this was always a problem with the VIa chipsets.


Totally agree that the Celeron and Pentium-M are pretty much the same. I bought the i7210 (Pentium) but should have bought the i7209 which represents good value for money when you consider the docking station.

REgards
Steve.

 Pentium M 1ghz give TWICE the performance of the Via C7-m 1ghz ------>  BUUUUUH

"Celeron M 900mhz in the original samsung Q1 scores just below the pentium due to the 100mhz clock difference."

Not necessarily. It could be because of both the higher core frecuency and mostly because of higher hit rates of it's 2 MB cache L2. You would need to overclock the Celeron M to 1 GHz and run the benchmarks to prove your point.

Igor Sotelo:

"Celeron M 900mhz in the original samsung Q1 scores just below the pentium due to the 100mhz clock difference."

Not necessarily. It could be because of both the higher core frecuency and mostly because of higher hit rates of it's 2 MB cache L2. You would need to overclock the Celeron M to 1 GHz and run the benchmarks to prove your point.

Yes necessarily. Its been proven countless times and its common knowledge in the CPU world that the cache size difference in Celeron M and Pentium M makes less than 1% performance difference. There are already benchmarks online that prove this. Please stop questioning me.

I might have bought a UMPC with no L2 cache, but buying VIA was definitely not in my plans. I remember all too well the 4-in-1 debacle WRT to games like Galactic Battlegrounds. So far, I've seen nothing to change my mind about avoiding VIA, but I must admit that I haven't looked.

Do you have anything new to say beside what we all know since 9 month ago or more?

grimster:

Igor Sotelo:

"Celeron M 900mhz in the original samsung Q1 scores just below the pentium due to the 100mhz clock difference."

Not necessarily. It could be because of both the higher core frecuency and mostly because of higher hit rates of it's 2 MB cache L2. You would need to overclock the Celeron M to 1 GHz and run the benchmarks to prove your point.

Yes necessarily. Its been proven countless times and its common knowledge in the CPU world that the cache size difference in Celeron M and Pentium M makes less than 1% performance difference. There are already benchmarks online that prove this. Please stop questioning me.

I question your logic and methology, which is obviously flawed (jumping into conclusions, generalizing and taking others research for a law written in stone). And, may I add that a smarter person would perhaps take an opinion disagreement with more tolerance, as that's an intellingence maesure.

Benchmarking is a complex process. And depending on what certain program measures, the results will vary. Besides, the microprocessor cache relevance can't be measured if the memory subsystem isn't stressed.

Finally, there are many different type of Celeron M and Pentium M processors. The Q1 has the 353 model and the Q1p the 723. Other models have different characteristics. What may be the ground breaking conclusions for Celeron M 1.3 GHz 512K vs. Pentium M 1.4 GHz 1M with who knows what chipset and what benchmark, is not automatically true for the Q1 models with the 915GMS chipset.

I'm still waiting to see benchmark results the grim said he did a month ago at the start of this thread:

I have the Samsung Q1p (pentioum 1ghz version) and have ran some benchmarks and compared it to a VIA C7-M.

I asked back in 1/25/2007 for him to provide his benchmarks in http://origamiproject.com/forums/2/15800/ShowThread.aspx, but he has never responded.  At the top of this thread he alludes to testing a Q1 p Pentium M 1ghz that he owns against the "scores" of an original Q1 with the Celeron M 900mhz, and is not specific with the VIA C7-M 1ghz. I asked if they were all Q1's because that would be an interesting comparison despite other subtle differences.

Igor, thanks for pointing out grim is probably using references from other people's work, I just assumed he was generalizing most of the time and spouting out a few tech sound bytes to make up for his obvious self esteem issues.

As far as the UMPC or PC a person wants to buy, that is his or her business and it doesn't make them an idiot for purchasing one with a Via. Despite all those benchmark numbers thrown around, is it really that critical for running most PC software like internet browsers, email, MS Office, mapping, or whatever?

I only find them helpfull for comparison, but each UMPC is engineered to meet at least 80% of the typical mobile PC user's needs, making sacrifices for what makes that specific model unique. Most "consumers" would agree some of these products easily exceed their needs, if not they should look at other levels.  The OQO is a prime example of features over sacrifice to optimize the size of their products by embedding the components in a compact dense motherboard, thus their decision to use the Via CPU's and have the RAM fixed, one of the reasons they are a true pocket size PC over the Sony UX series that uses the Intel CPU's.

I hold more respect for the members on this forum that provide detail of their findings, don't go on witch hunts to ridicule others, and are willing to put themselves out there on their own sites in an attempt to help others and provide positive contributions to forums.  Chippy, Citanic, JKK, Jenn, ThoughtFix, just to name a few, thanks!

grim, get a laptop, I don't even know why you even bother with this site.  You asked not to be questioned, but I question your intent.  You harp about performance & keyboards, well there are plenty laptops out there with Intel Centrino Core 2 Duo CPU's around 2ghz with 2gb RAM, the latest Intel graphics for Vista Aero Glass, and you can bump up to a 100gb 7200 speed hard drive. Despite your illusion of being the self appointed top expert on everything, you really sound ignorant with your generalizations and lack of detail.  Really, get a life or last least get help with your self worth issues. lol

Can anyone call 911 and ask for the paramedics?  :-D

I have to add that it´s very hard to compare Apples with Pears. From my tests and the tests of my others here is easy to see that VIA processor is the best encrypting and decrypting files. If you put that functionality in any Benchmark that will give as result a score that´s far from the real life experience. VIA processor is also the best so far in the market from the point of view of Battery Power saving.

So, there always be the question of what is more important for each individual user and task: battery life vs performance. Depending of what is the what you are looking you can select what processor is the best.

Like already have been said and I can confirm that because I own both a UMPC with Celeron and a UMPC with VIA, both devices performance is good for more than 80% of the market.

Again... if you want performance, go with Intel, if you want battery life, go with VIA.

Hi,

> Again... if you want performance, go with Intel, if you want battery life, go with VIA.
>
Wouldn't the Pentium M based machines be the best of both worlds?
Like the Q1P with SpeedStep?

Short answer: Nope.

Lol.  The last couple of posts were hilarious.  Call 911!  LMAO.  You're right Frank the Q1 P doesn't have an advantage with speedstepping.  I don't know about Vista with speedstepping but with XP it doesn't really help with the battery life.  The most I got from my Q1 P is 2:20 with constant inking and light internet surfing. 

I don't know about other UMPCs but hearing from Hugo Ortega with his Q1b, he obtained 9 hours of battery life with an extended battery!  That is really really awesome!  Lol sorry guys for ranting uselessly but I cannot refrain myself from posting how amused I was from reading this thread.

I sincerely apologize for not following the cardinal rule of counting to ten first, but I’m glad to oblige for everyone’s entertainment. I’ll try to keep it “lite” next time…