Q: Why don't desktops us mobile cpus?
in [Hardware]
|
From: jaster on 19 Dec 2005 21:45 I know the motherboards are different but is there a reason why desktop computer aren't built to use mobile cpus? I assume desktop and mobile are about the same performance for the average user, mobile cpus are capable enough to run 99% of the games available, and mobile cpus run cooler and more efficient than desktop cpus. I'm not talking about bleeding edge computing but about the average user happy running XP home on anything from 1-2.4mhz cpu. Wouldn't a Centrino or Turino work ? Could I pop an AMD64 Turino into a desktop motherboard?
From: Paul on 19 Dec 2005 22:51 In article <2fKpf.4149$fO5.109(a)newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, jaster <jaster(a)home.net> wrote: > I know the motherboards are different but is there a reason why desktop > computer aren't built to use mobile cpus? > I assume desktop and mobile are about the same performance for the > average user, mobile cpus are capable enough to run 99% of the games > available, and mobile cpus run cooler and more efficient than desktop > cpus. > > I'm not talking about bleeding edge computing but about the average user > happy running XP home on anything from 1-2.4mhz cpu. Wouldn't a Centrino > or Turino work ? Could I pop an AMD64 Turino into a desktop motherboard? There are a few Turions running on DFI motherboards. There are Pentium-M processors using Asus CT479 adapters on some older Asus S478 motherboards. There are Aopen and DFI 855GM and 915GM motherboards, intended for Pentium-M. Searching on 855GM or 915GM could turn up more of them. Here is a tiny product, with Pentium-M http://www.mini-itx.com/store/?c=2#p1630 You have to look around to find them, but there are products out there. Remember that mobile processors are mainly an OEM thing, used in making laptops/notebooks. The distribution channels are not set up for hobbyists. But maybe that is changing... http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103523 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819111172 Motherboard makers think in terms of "concepts", like desktop, workstation, server, multimedia_machine. It can take a lot of time, before the momentum builds, to create new "concept" designs. Why would a motherboard mahufacturer spend $1 million developing a motherboard, and only sell 10,000 of them ? There has to be a solid proven market, capable of selling a lot of motherboards, before the effort would be put into such products. Keep looking, and you may find something useful. Paul
From: kony on 20 Dec 2005 03:00 On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 02:45:18 GMT, jaster <jaster(a)home.net> wrote: >I know the motherboards are different but is there a reason why desktop >computer aren't built to use mobile cpus? Because mobile CPUs are usually optimized for low power consumption, not performance. It matters far more when one needs it to run off a battery. If we're only considering green-ideals, then we can't very well focus on only a CPU, would have to consider why people drive big SUVs, or buy large TVs, etc, etc, etc. They don't because they don't anticipate the effects to matter in their lifetime. >I assume desktop and mobile are about the same performance for the >average user, Then you'd be assuming wrong. Pentium - M is an unexpectedly good performer but this has a lot to do with perspective too, as P4 isn't nearly as good as Intel would have you believe if you start benching it on the older/typical applications everyone's running, not the new high-end professional stuff optimized for a P4. >mobile cpus are capable enough to run 99% of the games >available, "Capable" is rather arbitrary... The slowest desktop CPU of any (then current) generation is also fairly capable of runing games, and yet that's not usually what people would prefer for gaming. > and mobile cpus run cooler and more efficient than desktop >cpus. Yes, but don't forget "more expensive". I would buy a Pentium-M system before a P4, but remember that for desktop usage, most people don't need anything new, their fairly low requirements would run fine on their current system- if only that system keeps running. If it breaks they'll tend to want the cheapest thing that gets them a system that works, and that isn't usually one with a mobile CPU in it. They prefer lower cost over power savings, or simply buy OEM, when an OEM will also prefer cost savings, especially since that OEM is not paying the power bill to run the system. > >I'm not talking about bleeding edge computing but about the average user >happy running XP home on anything from 1-2.4mhz cpu. Wouldn't a Centrino >or Turino work ? Could I pop an AMD64 Turino into a desktop motherboard? Yes, it would work. It'd still be more expensive, including a specialty motherboard that costs more per unit due to selling in lower volume. Truth is, after all is said and done the cost to an OEM between one CPU and another is less than all the other expenses, to get an otherwise same system with a mobile CPU at same price, the system would be FAR slower. Even so, if one doesnt' need the performance why would they get a mobile CPU at all instead of a Via CPU? Much cheaper, it suits the requirement but the technically uninclined will end up deferring to some techno-whiz that suggests the highest performance instead. In summary, if one is only doing basic things on their system, the question is not "why not a mobile CPU", it's "why buy anything at all, instead of continuing to use their current system"... and that is what most do, there are many people with sub-1GHz systems that find them sufficient.
From: jaster on 20 Dec 2005 12:52 On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 03:51:28 +0000, Paul thoughtfully wrote: > In article <2fKpf.4149$fO5.109(a)newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, jaster > <jaster(a)home.net> wrote: > >> I know the motherboards are different but is there a reason why desktop >> computer aren't built to use mobile cpus? I assume desktop and mobile >> are about the same performance for the average user, mobile cpus are >> capable enough to run 99% of the games available, and mobile cpus run >> cooler and more efficient than desktop cpus. >> >> I'm not talking about bleeding edge computing but about the average user >> happy running XP home on anything from 1-2.4mhz cpu. Wouldn't a >> Centrino or Turino work ? Could I pop an AMD64 Turino into a desktop >> motherboard? > > There are a few Turions running on DFI motherboards. > > There are Pentium-M processors using Asus CT479 adapters on some older > Asus S478 motherboards. > > There are Aopen and DFI 855GM and 915GM motherboards, intended for > Pentium-M. Searching on 855GM or 915GM could turn up more of them. > > Here is a tiny product, with Pentium-M > > http://www.mini-itx.com/store/?c=2#p1630 Interesting little motherboards. Mini-itx needs HDTV and SPD/IF in their Hush-E line. > > You have to look around to find them, but there are products out there. > > Remember that mobile processors are mainly an OEM thing, used in making > laptops/notebooks. The distribution channels are not set up for hobbyists. > But maybe that is changing... > Intel doesn't list selection of mobile processors as an option in their selection chart. > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103523 > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819111172 > > Motherboard makers think in terms of "concepts", like desktop, > workstation, server, multimedia_machine. It can take a lot of time, before > the momentum builds, to create new "concept" designs. Why would a > motherboard mahufacturer spend $1 million developing a motherboard, and > only sell 10,000 of them ? There has to be a solid proven market, capable > of selling a lot of motherboards, before the effort would be put into such > products. Keep looking, and you may find something useful. You're probably on the right track. Like automakers they've invested in desktop cpu/motherboard computing and haven't yet committed to green processing, ie, low noise, low heat, less toxic materials. With Via leading the charge, Intel and AMD are addressing heat and noise issues but it'll take time for motherboard vendors to catch up. Media Center PCs may turn this around. Probably AMD/Intel develop the bigger, faster cpus and push these out to recoup research costs and motherboard vendors just follow the flow. Hats off to Mini-Itx, DFI and AOpen for bucking the trend.
From: jaster on 20 Dec 2005 13:26
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 08:00:20 +0000, kony thoughtfully wrote: > On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 02:45:18 GMT, jaster <jaster(a)home.net> wrote: > >>I know the motherboards are different but is there a reason why desktop >>computer aren't built to use mobile cpus? > > Because mobile CPUs are usually optimized for low power consumption, not > performance. It matters far more when one needs it to run off a > battery. Exactly why cpu and motherboard manufacturers should consider mobile cpus. > If we're only considering green-ideals, then we can't very well focus on > only a CPU, would have to consider why people drive big SUVs, or buy > large TVs, etc, etc, etc. They don't because they don't anticipate the > effects to matter in their lifetime. Not really reverent to discussion because most people buy complete PCs not just the components. Like buying a car you simply make sure the car engine is adequate for your needs but you don't buy a GM engines for a Volkswagon cars. >>I assume desktop and mobile are about the same performance for the >>average user, > > Then you'd be assuming wrong. Pentium - M is an unexpectedly good > performer but this has a lot to do with perspective too, as P4 isn't > nearly as good as Intel would have you believe if you start benching it > on the older/typical applications everyone's running, not the new > high-end professional stuff optimized for a P4. > >>mobile cpus are capable enough to run 99% of the games available, > > "Capable" is rather arbitrary... The slowest desktop CPU of any (then > current) generation is also fairly capable of runing games, and yet > that's not usually what people would prefer for gaming. > That's my point. Joe and Jane Average use a home/office PC good enough to surf AOL/MSN, email, print pictures, balance the checkbook, maybe play music and video. Upgrades come when Joe or Jane needs to run some software that won't work on the current system or the HD fills up. >> and mobile cpus run cooler and more efficient than desktop >>cpus. > > Yes, but don't forget "more expensive". I would buy a Pentium-M system > before a P4, but remember that for desktop usage, most people don't need > anything new, their fairly low requirements would run fine on their > current system- if only that system keeps running. If it breaks they'll > tend to want the cheapest thing that gets them a system that works, and > that isn't usually one with a mobile CPU in it. > > They prefer lower cost over power savings, or simply buy OEM, when an > OEM will also prefer cost savings, especially since that OEM is not > paying the power bill to run the system. > OEMs have the same issue as Joe and Jane Average. There are few motherboards using mobile (OEM) cpus, so they use regular motherboards with desktop chips. > > >>I'm not talking about bleeding edge computing but about the average user >>happy running XP home on anything from 1-2.4mhz cpu. Wouldn't a >>Centrino or Turino work ? Could I pop an AMD64 Turino into a desktop >>motherboard? > > Yes, it would work. It'd still be more expensive, including a specialty > motherboard that costs more per unit due to selling in lower volume. > Truth is, after all is said and done the cost to an OEM between one CPU > and another is less than all the other expenses, to get an otherwise > same system with a mobile CPU at same price, the system would be FAR > slower. Yes currently looks like 17% more than an AMD desktop cpu of the same speed but is that because of manufacturing quantity, ie, fewer chips made? > > Even so, if one doesnt' need the performance why would they get a mobile > CPU at all instead of a Via CPU? Much cheaper, it suits the requirement > but the technically uninclined will end up deferring to some techno-whiz > that suggests the highest performance instead. > > In summary, if one is only doing basic things on their system, the > question is not "why not a mobile CPU", it's "why buy anything at all, > instead of continuing to use their current system"... and that is what > most do, there are many people with sub-1GHz systems that find them > sufficient. My question was not whether to get by on older or mobile cpus but more of why aren't manufacturers focused on making mobile cpus instead of desktop cpus. Since mobiles are more efficient and greener than desktop cpus. I think nospam (Paul) has the right idea which is they've invested research in desktop cpu m/bs but not yet mobile cpu m/bs. |