To: economaniack who wrote (243088 ) 10/31/2007 9:22:44 PM From: wbmw Read Replies (1) | Respond to Re: This makes sense for the vast majority of users who virtually never stress their notebook processors, and want a bit a burst speed and long battery life. Seems to have worked out OK as AMD is gaining in that space. Core 2 Duo does much worse in this metric anandtech.com Idle power draw for the dv6500t and the 6515b with a TL-66 are the same at 22W, with the TL-60 using slightly more power. Once we crank up the load on the system, however, both AMD configurations end up using 5W and 11W (TL-60 and TL-66, respectively) more than the Intel laptop . The "max load" results shown above involve running Folding@Home SMP at the same time as we run a game in order to fully stress all CPU cores as well as the GPU.we can clearly conclude that the Intel CPU requires less power to do more work at load . The power delta is 35 W for the T7300, 39 W for the TL-60, and 48 W for the TL-66. AMD does well at reducing their idle power requirements, but when the CPU is actually working Intel leads by a relatively large margin. wife as a Dell notebook with a Core 2 Duo and the battery life is really pathetic.
