Up to 80x Performance in 15 years! - 2006 Pentium M vs 2021 Tiger Lake Budget Laptops

[@deilusi]

4:20 I would argue that you cannot get decent single core performance without 4 cores total anymore. We have so many background tasks and especially windows is running thousands of processes in background, so if you don't have "sink" thread where they can be pushed, your single core performance will have to waste cycles there as well. that almost singlethreaded tests 12:35 are what I am taking about, app is 100% single thread, but windows background, antivirus, windows update, tracking, it all uses rest of the load you've seen. 2/4 is to low for any more than a browser. 4/4 is the minimum (in 2022 even more) that can be used, if you are savvy enough to know how to check it. (don't loot at 4GB of ram anymore, if you can as well)

[@25557813]

Pentium m was so fast with xp, you didnt need a desktop at all. I used my dell 700m for 7 years.

[@GraveUypo]

well, duh. pentium M was better than intel's desktop offerings, so that stands to reason.

[@razorsz195]

I feel that these processors excel in short burst tasks but for a 2600k from years and years ago to smoke it due to power availability, surely even a low end CPU should be surpassing it by now, granted its not a desktop and that performance isn't strictly needed but i would have expected a larger difference.

[@Stefan-]

I own both a I7 2600K and a I5 2500K machine with the 2600K still being my main computer today over 10 years after i bought it (great buy) and im impressed that it scored significally higher in a few of the tests still to this day. Before getting the I5 2500K used earlier this year to use as a computer for recording music at my rehearsal studio i did compare a lot of benchmarks to try and make sure it was powerful enough and was what i needed and i was surpriced that there were new low cost prebuilt desktops today in 2022 that were less powerful than the 2500K. The 2500K i got was a really great choice for my needs and will probably be for a very long time and my 2600K is still going very strong but when Windows 10 is EOL in 2025 i may have to get something newer since its not compatible with Windows 11 unfortunately.

[@rafradeki]

i7 2600k has twice the cores though and not power limited unlike the the laptop

[@Stefan-]

@@rafradeki Sure, but its still crazy that a 10 year old computer isnt pretty much obsolete and that there are brand new computers not only this laptop in the video but also the cheap desktops that i mentioned in my post that is at least to some degree less powerful than my old 2600K and 2500K. Personally in the 90´s and early 2000s i remember buying a new desktop every 4-5 years because after that they were almost unusable and we are not talking cheap low powered ones either but rather computers with top processors that cost more than the 2600K that i have now (also not taking inflation into consideration).

[@aqua-technic]

I have to admit, the performance gains aren't as impressive as I would have anticipated. It will be interesting to see if improvements plateau over the next few years

[@GewelReal]

more like improvements skyrocket in the next few years

[@KokoroKatsura]

A N I M E N I M E

[@t1e6x12]

@@GewelReal Who knows. Intel is full of delays.

[@Maximus20778]

Celerons pass this wym

[@TM-88]

I like your channel dude!

[@MrJamesonStyles]

Interesting numbers, again like others I would have expected greater improvements in single threaded performance compared to way back then. Especially when you compare clock-for-clock it's not nearly as much as I would have anticipated. I would love to see a Pentium D extreme edition with hyperthreading compared to a Tiger Lake desktop i3, for a thread-parity comparison. With both chips having access to full desktop power delivery, what is the best case scenario for each architecture? However, since a PD Extreme is very rare and collectable at this point, I would be quite happy to see a Xeon 5063 or similar compared instead. On that note, would you have any interest in benchmarking older Xeon chips for gaming as well? I remember back in the day I always wanted to see what those were capable of, but was stymied by the high cost of motherboards and poor case compatibility that I wasn't willing to deal with. But for benchmarking it could be viable.

[@gparyani]

There were no desktop Tiger Lake parts, except mobile parts used in all-in-one desktops and custom mini boards

[@joaogross4273]

8 times? I thought it would be way more. My really old PC had a Intel Core2 Duo E7400 @ 2.80GHz, whilst my newest PC aquisition has a Intel Core i5-12400F. They are from generation nearly 15 years apart. If you look at CPU benchmark, the multi-core/multi-thread performance has improved 20x. So 8x seems a bit disapointing.

[@Scorpius165]

Don't forget that he is comparing to a 2-core low power mobile CPU. There is at least (probably more than) ~x4 difference between 12400F and 1115G4 based on core count and frequency alone.

[@jordicoma]

But before the laptops was also better in other ways. It had more IO, cd/dvd drivers, more ports and you could change battery easily.

[@jeffrydemeyer5433]

Some things can't be made to go faster by improving the IPC and are just stuck on clock speed. A single Tejas like core meant for single threaded computing at blazing speed on meteor lake would be nice. The platform is meant to mix and match :)

[@inwedavid6919]

The best is to extrapolate the speed of each like if they run at the same speed, then older intel look a lot bore better than they are and you see that intel do its efforts in powermanagement rather than in performance increase.

[@awesomecomputers7076]

Compare oldest celeron m able to run windows 10 to the newest celeron laptop

[@Redmage913]

That could be a hilarious video. "See how much the Celeron has(n't) improved!" Sad thing is, I know they have gotten better, but they are so bad, it might be difficult to feel the improvements...

[@harryshuman9637]

One thing I don't miss about 2000s technology is the laptops. Massively bulky, massively underpowered, massively underwhelming in terms of peripherals and incredibly hot on thermals.

[@ElPrezzy]

Yeah, desktops have come a long way in the past, let's limit and say 7 years. But laptops have made ENORMOUS bounds in the same period. Incredible CPU power (Soon to get better with things like AMD Dragon Range-x), much better attention to detail paid to each part of the machine. And of course, integrated graphics capability is quite a bit better. Things like the 6800U would have been unthinkable 7 years ago. BUT, the dedicated laptops GPUs have made huge strides as well. If you get a top end laptop GPU, it can often come very close to or reach absolute parity with the last-gen top desktop chip. That's CRAZY! Let alone if you go back farther than 7 years, dedicated laptop GPUs were really really bad compared to basically anything on desktop. Laptops have truly exploded in terms of capability and usability (I would say price as well, but there have always been very expensive laptops)

[@edgostyn]

I work almost the time with geoprocessed images. And I had one of these 2006 Pentium M machines. It involves a lot of vectorial processing and compressing/decompressing opperations. For this kind of work, is more likely 80x performance improvement than only 10x... So, yes, Intel made a really nice job in these 15 years!

[@shippyshank_loves_carsandsound]

Why is this guy's voice so good

[@Geert365]

So not 80 but about 10 times faster? Or am i missing something? On userbenchmark i find it is a good twenty times faster. Like i said in other comment, got dothan laptop with same specs, but with ssd, maybe do cinebench one of these days.

[@IngvarrKahn]

The video is not correct. The Pentium M was the top processor, especially from 2003 to 2005. And it is correct to compare it with the i7 1195G7 processor. Not with the mediocre below average i3. It's the same with laptops, you have different classes of laptops in your video.

[@Biedropegaz]

Only one feature should be taken into account, processor power consumption. These days intel/nvidia are "making progess" putting more and more current throught processor to make it faster.

[@mikel9656]

i would agree with you only on one performance metric, multi threaded performance. the single core performance is comparable due to the the similar clock frequency micro arch for the i3 and i7 11th gen parts. then arguably the situation gets worse. then if you control for the clock speed advantage of the tiger lake parts its down right depressing. you can really tell that Intel is using micro arch based on the Pentium m still.

[@SlickOnTop]

See if you can run a launch windows 10 build on a Pentium 4HT computer.

[@mistrotech8894]

You definitely can. Even windows 11 if it is Prescott... Though it might not be enjoyable to use.

[@FireFoxDestroyer]

Did you get one with thermal paste replaced?

[@bibasik7]

Now compare Sandy Bridge to Kaby Lake.

[@elmariachi5133]

But the 2006 notebook still runs in 2021. The 2021 flimsy plastic crap will be done well before it's 15 years old.

[@erwing.3902]

For this long period the differences in performance are not as big as I had expected. And now you have to imagine that the "Pentium M" (Dothan/Banias) is "only" an improved PentiumIII. In Truth the Dothan/Pentium M was the successor of the PentiumIII. The Pentium 4 was different and not inline with these other CPUs.

[@Russell970]

you look like David Beckham

[@FullyBuffered]

Ha I haven't heard that before, but I'll take it!

[@mtaufiqnmtn]

More like tom holland i suppose

[@jjohnson71958]

i once had the dell dell b130 notebook ran nice

[@MitternachtAngel]

Some people really think that technology is magic and don't appreciate the amount of money, incredible engineering and science behind it. This low end 28w 2 core LAPTOP i3 is better than the legendary 4 core i5 2500k. A 95w desktop CPU that still being a capable processor to this day. The i3 12100 just destroys anything from 5 years ago, even the Intel Core i7-7740X.

[@ecchichanf]

> The i3 12100 just destroys anything from 5 years ago, even the Intel Core i7-7740X. I think i9-7980XE (also on the x299 plattform like the i7-7740X) is faster than the i3-12100. Cinebench R23: i9-7980XE @ 4,6 GHz ~28.000 points i3-12100 ~8300 points

[@LAHegarty]

You're like GreenHamGaming without the Ham.

[@tenseur2]

Le cpu Tyger Lake consomme en réalité plus de 28W ... car 28W c'est le cpu sans turbo !

[@honkhonkler7732]

We're obviously reaching diminishing returns. That's why silicon dies keep getting bigger and power draw keeps getting worse. It's not just Intel. Look at how big the coolers are on Nvidia's flagship GPUs today vs even something from just a few years ago like the Titan Xp. It's because the chips are effectively a furnace since a significant portion of the performance gain comes from simply expanding the die. Today, you can use a well equipped 10 year old computer to do demanding modern tasks. 10 years ago, an upgraded 10 year old computer MIGHT be a competent email and basic web browsing machine. 10 years before that, a 10 year old machine would be entirely useless for modern tasks.

[@johnmadsen37]

The first 5 year of that 15 year span is what matters. I have 10 year old 2600k 4.2Ghz quad core still running and it’s as fast as the new stuff for professional work. I started getting new stuff for the at least 64gb or ram and the nvme storage along with the 3x memory speed. Exciting times up to 2010 for everything.

[@GraveUypo]

that was half-true up until about 2017. now, nope. the 2600k is very well outpaced. every year since 2019 has seen more progress than the sum of 2012~2017. that doesn't mean the 2600k is e-waste. for office work, it's still entirely competent to the point you would never know you're using an 11 year old system, as long as you have enough ram and a nice ssd. heck it still drags its ass to relevancy even for games, even if it be a significant bottlenecks nowadays.

[@PreciousAlpschindler]

That old Dell laptop gave a build quality we wish Dell would do today. New XPS laptop is a disappointment

[@KeinNiemand]

You should have compared the Pentium M to a modern pentum, i3 is one level above pentium.

[@patrickdeunhouwer5926]

well my computer is still far to slow

[@PedroBastozz]

Why did you compare the pentium against such a shitty computer? 4gb of ddr4 ram, an i3 and a sata ssd 😂😂😂. My fucking phone destroys that shitbox. Should have gotten a more fair comparison.

[@Oscar4u69]

15 years for a single extra core and hypertheading 😑 Intel is the worst

[@PreciousAlpschindler]

I’m so disappointed with Intel lately with their obsolete 10nm. Intel7 my butt it’s still 10nm. And their using E-core in a desktop PC let alone in an unlocked cpu?!!! Is this a joke Intel?!!! Intel cpu is so obsolete and disappointing that my next pc is now using an AMD Ryzen that use 5nm process and for a desktop it’s use all the real powerful cores. Also Intel UHD Graphic is a joke and AMD Radeon Vega is way superior at least for a cheap laptop