Mobile PC Performance: Built-To-Order Systems

5528 users shared this document! click

TEST REPORT SUMMARY FEBRUARY 2006 Mobile PC Performance: Built-To-Order
Systems Executive summary
Intel Corporation (Intel) commissioned Principled Technologies (PT) to run a set of performance tests on two
pairs of built-to-order Acer laptops:
Acer TravelMate 4402WLMi (with an AMD Turion 64 ML-30 processor; $1,099 at time of
purchase), which we compared to an Acer TravelMate 4062WLMi (with an Intel Pentium M 740 processor; $974 at time of
purchase) Acer TravelMate 4404WLMi (with an AMD Turion 64 ML-34 processor; $1,199 at time of
purchase, but $1,149 on 03/03/06), which we
compared to an Acer TravelMate 4202WLMi (with an Intel Core Duo T2300 processor; $1,274 at time of
purchase, but $1,099 on 03/03/06)
The goal in choosing the systems was to find units as
close in price and configuration as possible.

The goal of the testing was to gauge the performance
and energy consumption that laptop buyers would
experience on systems they purchased online from
such well-known sites as www.newegg.com using five custom performance tests. Intel identified the test systems, tests, test procedures, and test settings. PT purchased and set up the systems, and PT executed all
tests. We ran performance tests using the following applications:
Performance test applications Adobe Photoshop Elements 4.0 with Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0 Apple iTunes 6.0.3 InterVideo iVideoToGo for PSP Microsoft Windows Movie Maker 2.1 Pinnacle Studio 10
Tables 1 and 2 summarize the performance results and power measurements of each test. Each result is the
median of three runs on each system. (In the event of a tie we chose the run with the higher power
consumption. If the power consumption score was also tied, we then chose the first run we executed with
those scores.) For these performance and power measurement tests, lower scores are better because they
represent the time or the power the system required to complete each workload.

We used the Intel Power Acquisition Recording Kit (iPARK) in the power measurement tests. The iPARK
device is an external unit that connects to a host computer through a USB cable. It also has a DC power
cable that powers the system under test. We used the iPARK device to monitor the average DC power
consumption of each system while under load. We then multiplied iPARKs average DC power score by the
time the workload took to complete to calculate the Workload Energy Consumption (WEC) in Watt-seconds.
We divided the WEC Watt-seconds score by 3600 (the number of seconds in an hour) to calculate the WEC
Watt-hours we reported below.
Key findings The Intel Pentium M 740 processor-based
system ran from 7 to 23 percent faster than
the AMD Turion 64 ML-30 processor-based
system on all performance tests. The Intel Pentium M 740 processor-based
system consumed from 66 to 86 percent less
power than the AMD Turion 64 ML-30
processor- based system during all
performance tests. The Intel Core Duo T2300 processor-based
system ran from 36 to 100 percent faster
than the AMD Turion 64 ML-34 processor-
based system on all performance tests. The Intel Core Duo T2300 processor-based
system consumed from 133 to 219 percent
less power than the AMD Turion 64 ML-34
processor-based system during all
performance tests. Because screen brightness can affect the amount of power a system consumes, for each pair of comparison
systems we set the brightness to be as close as we could make it to the brightness of the dimmer of the two
systems. Consequently, each Intel-based system was actually slightly brighter than its AMD-based
comparison system. The nits measurements in parentheses below each system name in Table 1 and Table 2
give the tested brightness for each system.

In the rightmost column of each result set, we compare the median results of the systems. We calculate this
comparison by dividing the AMD-based systems score by the Intel-based systems score. Consequently,
comparative results above 1.00 indicate tests on which the Intel-based system performed better or was more
power-efficient, and those below 1.00 indicate tests on which the AMD-based system performed better or was
more power-efficient. See Appendix C for the detailed results of each test run. Acer TM4402WLMi AMD Turion 64 ML-30 1.6 GHz (135 nits) Acer TM4062WLMi Intel Pentium M 740 1.73 GHz (142 nits) Comparative Rating Acer TM4402WLMi AMD Turion 64 ML-30 1.6 GHz (135 nits) Acer TM4062WLMi Intel Pentium M 740 1.73 GHz (142 nits) Comparative Rating 502 433 1.16 Adobe Photoshop Elements 4.0 with
Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0 8.03 4.61 1.74 260 224 1.16 Apple iTunes 6.0.3 4.23 2.40 1.76 64 52 1.23 InterVideo iVideoToGo for PSP 1.01 0.55 1.84 203 165 1.23 Microsoft Windows Movie Maker 2.1 3.34 1.81 1.85 287 269 1.07 Pinnacle Studio 10 4.70 2.84 1.65 POWER CONSUMPTION RESULTS (watt hours) PERFORMANCE RESULTS (seconds) TESTS Table 1: Results of performance and power measurement tests on the AMD-based Acer TravelMate 4402WLMi
and the Intel-based Acer TravelMate 4062WLMi. Lower scores are better on both execution time and Workload
Energy Consumption. Acer TM 4404WLMi AMD Turion 64 ML- 34 1.8 GHz (165 nits) Acer TM4202WLMi Intel Core Duo T2300 1.66 GHz (174 nits) Comparative Rating Acer TM 4404WLMi AMD Turion 64 ML- 34 1.8 GHz (165 nits) Acer TM4202WLMi Intel Core Duo T2300 1.66 GHz (174 nits) Comparative Rating 444 249 1.78 Adobe Photoshop Elements 4.0 with
Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0 7.67 2.66 2.88 248 131 1.89 Apple iTunes 6.0.3 4.10 1.40 2.93 57 42 1.36 InterVideo iVideoToGo for PSP 0.96 0.41 2.34 182 91 2.00 Microsoft Windows Movie Maker 2.1 3.19 1.00 3.19 261 172 1.52 Pinnacle Studio 10 4.44 1.71 2.60 PERFORMANCE RESULTS (seconds) TESTS POWER CONSUMPTION RESULTS (watt hours) Table 2: Results of performance and power measurement tests on the AMD-based Acer TravelMate 4404WLMi
and the Intel-based Acer TravelMate 4202WLMi. Lower scores are better on both execution time and Workload
Energy Consumption.
The full report is available at http://www.principledtechnologies.com/clients/reports/Intel/MobilePCPerf1.pdf. Principled Technologies, Inc. 4813 Emperor Blvd., Suite 100 Durham, NC 27703 www.principledtechnologies.com Principled Technologies is a registered trademark of Principled Technologies, Inc. All other product names are the trademarks of their respective owners.
Disclaimer of Warranties; Limitation of Liability: PRINCIPLED TECHNOLOGIES, INC. HAS MADE REASONABLE EFFORTS TO ENSURE THE ACCURACY AND
VALIDITY OF ITS TESTING, HOWEVER, PRINCIPLED TECHNOLOGIES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
RELATING TO THE TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS, THEIR ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS OR QUALITY, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF
FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. ALL PERSONS OR ENTITIES RELYING ON THE RESULTS OF ANY TESTING DO SO AT THEIR OWN RISK,
AND AGREE THAT PRINCIPLED TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ITS EMPLOYEES AND ITS SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY WHATSOEVER FROM
ANY CLAIM OF LOSS OR DAMAGE ON ACCOUNT OF ANY ALLEGED ERROR OR DEFECT IN ANY TESTING PROCEDURE OR RESULT.
From Intel Corporation: Performance tests and ratings are measured using specific computer systems and/or components and reflect the approximate performance
of Intel products as measured by those tests. Any difference in system hardware or software design or configuration may affect actual performance. Buyers should
consult other sources of information to evaluate the performance of systems or components they are considering purchasing. For more information on performance
tests and on the performance of Intel products, visit http://www.intel.com/performance/resources/limits.htm or call (U.S.) 1-800-628-8686 or 1-916-356-3104.

Comments