Is Pentium M a better CAD chip than P4 and Athlon even?

I wouldn't go quite that far. The PM had to be overclocked to match the other processors. If you're willing to overclock your system for max performance, do this:

If you compare the test results between the two articles, the overclocked AthlonFX outruns the overclocked PM.

While it is certainly true that the PM is clock-for-clock a bit faster than Athlon64, and quite a bit faster than P4, it isn't yet being manufactured at clock speeds that allow it to compete. As the article mentions, the future of Intel's processors is derived from PM, not P4. Until then, I'd say to stick with the Athlon.

Thanks Dale

I'm looking for a PC that uses as little power as possible. Can be left on all day.

But it must be able to do some heavy duty thing such as CAD work

Any advice on what CPU to go for?

Should I go dual core athlon? Is it pretty power thrifty?

Or maybe buy a laptop with a Pentium M chip in it? Can leave that on all day long without much heat buildup or power use?

Again the goal is to leave the PC on for days at a time. Maybe weeks at a time. And not affect my electric bill much or create a lot of ambient heat in the room.

If you're leaving your computer on for weeks at a time it's going to affect your electic bill whether it's a P4 or an M.

I have a P4, it generates a lot of heat but only when it's crunching. If your computer is static most of the time I would think you won't find the heat a problem. I doubt you could leave it on persistently without showing up on your bill though.

I leave my AMD64 FX53 on 24/7 as I do will many of my systems. Aside from the electric bill this doesn't seem to affect much and if anything makes them more reliable.

While Tom's has benchmarked a lot of things they didn't try their SW benchmark in this particular test. I would be interested in those results.

The PM is a very low power chip. I've seen other review sites measure power/benchmark score, and the PM scores very high on that chart.

These figures are for the CPU under full load. That may not be directly relevant to what you're trying to accomplish. My Athlon64 takes advantage of a feature called Cool n' Quiet to reduce it's clockspeed from 2200MHz to

800MHz when at idle. My temperature sensitive CPU fan only spins up a few times during an average workday because the copper heat sink can absorb the short bursts of high heat output. So how much power am I really using?

The PM can also throttle, but not automatically (as far as I can tell from my limited use of a Dell M60 laptop).

How much power do you need to save? If you spend an extra $1-1.5k on a laptop, do you come out ahead? How often will this machine be needed for CAD work? What is the cost of using a slower system to save power? It's all really hard to quantify.

Using a highly overclocked PM has a neato factor, but so does using an overclocked AthlonFX. One is faster than the other, but will use more power. My guess is that your time is worth more than your electricity, especially if your CPU can throttle itself according to CPU load.

Incidentally, do you plan other power saving schemes, like powering off monitors and hard drives?

True

But want to minimize the affect as much as possible

yes it is hard to quantify

Cause like you said the premium you might pay for Pent M may not be recovered in lower elect costs

Still..... I'm looking at it from an environmental view

Call me crazy. But I like the idea of being frugal with the earths resources

Hence the idea of using a Pent M chip for cad work

And actually.... this PC will be used for mundane computer things more than CAD work. I just need the ability to do some CAD at home when needed. Such as testing new software, trying new methods, etc

But it wont be a full on CAD production machine

Well, if your bottom line is not financial, then the laptop might be a good way to go. Not only will you have the lower power (and portability, but also the LCD display. IIRC, those are "less harmful" to the environment (lead disposal in particular). I don't know what the reality of that situation is from a manufacturing point of view. I think I remember hearing that simconductor fab plants do some grim things to water. If you're an environmentalist, I'm sure you know more about that than me, or at least where to look for info.

Anyhow, it sounds like fairly casual CAD usage, so ultimate CPU grunt power probably shouldn't take highest priority over cost, etc.

Actually, this sounds like a good "ask Slashdot" question.

yeah.....

Laptop would probably do me OK

I've just never owned one before and not sure if Id like one or not

Especially since most of the time it will be used as a "desktop".... i.e hardly moved

If you were gonna get a laptop yourself....what size screen would you for? Let me rephrase that.... what would be the SMALLEST screen you'd live with in a laptop?

And what resolution?

Hmm. I've never seen a laptop with enough room on the display. If you can't find a laptop with resolution to match your normal working environment, then you'll just be frustrated by it. Especially if you never take it anywhere.

I use the Dell M60 with 1920 pixels and I find it to be emminently usable, and less "jaggy" than many larger screens with larger pixels. I work only on laptops now, though indeed, I work primarily on small plastic products, and their molds. My current mold assembly and parts open in about 8 key files are over 100 megs, and work well and crisply on the M60.

I think it depends on ones comfort with the screen and software.

When I first started with 2D CAD, I had up to 3 screens. I do not see the need to do that now for my CAD work, as the windowing is much better, and 3D assemblies solve so much of the questions which multiple screens used to address.

Bo

I've got a Dell Latitude C840 (the non quadro version of the M50) with a

15" 1600x1200 screen - it's f> I use the Dell M60 with 1920 pixels and I find it to be emminently