cpu - What is the difference between mobile processors and regular ones?

07
2014-07
  • iamserious

    I am trying to get myself a custom built laptop and while I was making a choice of what goes into the laptop, the processor section had some interesting choices:

    Intel® Celeron® Dual Core Processor B840 (1.90 GHz) 2MB Cache

Intel® Core™i3 Dual Core Mobile Processor i3-2350M (2.30GHz) 3MB 
Intel® Core™i5 Dual Core Mobile Processor i5-2450M (2.50GHz) 3MB 
Intel® Core™i5 Dual Core Mobile Processor i5-2520M (2.50GHz) 3MB

Intel® Core™i7 Dual Core Mobile Processor i7-2640M (2.80GHz) 4MB
Intel® Core™i7 Quad Core Mobile Processor i7-2670QM (2.20GHz) 6MB
Intel® Core™i7 Quad Core Mobile Processor i7-2760QM (2.40GHz) 6MB
Intel® Core™i7 Quad Core Mobile Processor i7-2860QM (2.50GHz) 8MB

    I assumed that mobile processors are less capable than the regular ones, (since they are small and go into mobiles and what not) but something tells me this assumption is very stupid, even though wikipedia says otherwise

    I really want to get a quad core, i7 (fastest, let's say) but I don't want a mobile processor, I want a regular one. Some googling got me the differences between quad core and regular processors, but I am unable to find the difference between regular and mobile processors.

    So why would anyone offer me to get a mobile processor for my laptop?

    • Answers
  • RedGrittyBrick

    Mobile processors are for use in mobile computers, that is computers that are mostly carried around by their owner from place to place rather than being left, unmoving, on a desktop for most of their life.

    Mobile processors are obviously optimised for use in laptop/notebook/netbook computers.

    • Low current consumption to avoid quickly draining the laptop battery flat.
    • Low heat output to avoid overwhelming the limited cooling available in a laptop.

    The Processors used in mobile phones (cellphones/feature-phones/smartphones) are a different category (they are mostly ARM processors) and are optimised for even lower power and cooling resources.

    Tablets/slates/pads/fondleslabs form a middle ground where traditional desktop/laptop CPU architectures (e.g. x86) and traditional small-device architectures (e.g. ARM) are both used. You can view this as convergence from both directions.

    A necessary consequence is that mobile processors are slower but they probably incorporate power-saving tricks that are not so much used in desktop PCs (I think variable CPU clock-rates started in mobile processors).

    I wouldn't be surprised if a laptop with a workstation-class CPU had a very short run-time on battery and ran very hot (reducing the overall life of CPU and other components)

  • Corporate Geek

    you can compare several Intel CPUs at http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processor-comparison/compare-intel-processors.html to figure out the differences yourself.

    The "mobile" ones tend to have a way lower TDP, meaning the produce less heat when operating, which on the one hand means less power consumption -> longer battery life, and on the other hand means less cooling needed, therefore the system may operate more silent and again less power consuming.

    People who are interested in AMD CPUs, can find complete information and can compare CPUs using these two lists:

    Desktop Processor Solutions

    Notebook Processor Solutions


    • Related Question

    cpu - Is there a difference between AMD and Intel processors?
  • user15259

    I am about to upgrade my dell machine and will getting a custom pc built soon.

    There are two options that I see in my budget for the processor:

    1. AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition - Quad Core, AM2+/AM3, 3,4GHz, 8MB, Boxed
    2. Intel Core™ i5 Quad Processor i5-750 - 2,66GHz, Socket LGA1156, 8MB, Boxed m/fläkt

    I will be using the PC for graphic editing, web design and some gaming. The OS I will be using is windows 7.

    Which one is better for my purposes? and is there a difference between AMD and Intel, Will AMD support all of my drivers, programs etc?

    Sorry for the noob question.


    • Related Answers
  • John T

    You haven't made any indication of the operating system, but the programs should be compatible if they are made for the OS. The 2 processors are identical except the AMD has a higher clock speed to start with. Although I'd still opt for the i5 due to it's turbo feature.

    Some benchmarks here.

  • BrianW

    I don't mean this sarcastically, but if you don't know the difference, you will probably never notice it. Compatibility is a non-issue.

    According to reviews, the performance is very comparable between the two. Ignore answers about clock speed, it is not a relevant fact. You did mention graphic editing. In the linked benchmarks, the Intel i5 does noticeably better in that task.

    Tech Report Benchmarks

  • schnaader

    You (most likely) won't get compatibility issues with an AMD processor. As you can see, AMD provides a higher clock speed for the same or lower price.

    An advantage of the Intel processor is that it supports Turbo Boost which will overclock the processor on the fly if only one or two cores are used.

  • ianfuture

    Interestingly , and granted this is an older AMD CPU (Athlon XP)than those mentioned, but some applications don't seem to like AMD comapared to Intel if they are particularly processer intensive. My PC will not run BOINC on 32 bit AMD, but an older P3 Intel is fine. Additionaly my work PC AMD X2 64 also does not like BOINC, wont even install it. So while in theory there should not be any noticeable different some CPU intensive applications written for/on Intel architecture may not work 100% correctly on AMD in a Windows operating system.