Desktop vs laptops(both running windows)

comparison

Page 1 of 1

7 Replies - 1187 Views - Last Post: 06 September 2010 - 10:11 AM

#1 AhmerjavedC++   User is offline

  • D.I.C Regular

Reputation: 0
  • View blog
  • Posts: 253
  • Joined: 02-October 09

Desktop vs laptops(both running windows)

Posted 04 September 2010 - 10:54 PM

Hi,

I was wondering which has a more powerful CPU?.. A Desktop computer or a Laptop

i recently made a C++ program that counts up to 100,000 and then outputs a timestamp.. so i ran a test between my brand new laptop that runs windows 7 and claimed to be faster than my desktop computer running windows xp. Also i compared my dad's laptop which runs windows vista. the results were stunning. My Desktop beat my new laptop by 6 secs and my parents laptop by 8 secs. Oh ya all of them are Compaq/hp product. So in my case my desktop somehow has better processing speed than my laptops when running just simple windows such as notepad and internet. the laptops were not running anything.

here are the configurations for both:

Desktop:(windows xp)
Processor: AMD sempron Processor
Speed: 1.99 GHZ
RAM : 1.18GB
System type: 32 bit operating system

Laptop:(windows 7)
Processor: AMD Phenom II N620 Dual core Processor
Speed: 2.80 GHZ
RAM : 4.00 (3.74GB)
System type: 64 bit operating system

Laptop #2: (windows vista)
Processor: Intel Core duo
speed: 1.83 GHz
Ram: 3.00GB
System type: 32 Bit operating system

What are the factors that could affect a processor's speed?

heres the code i compiled and ran on the laptops and my desktop.

#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

int main()
{
 int number;
 int start;
 number = 0;
 
 cout << "speed checker";
 cin >> start;
 
 if(start == 1)
 {
 
  while (number != 100001)
  { 
  cout << number;
  cout << endl;
  number++;
  }
}
 
 struct tm *local;
  time_t t;

  t = time(NULL);
  local = localtime(&t);
  printf("Local time and date: %s\n", asctime(local));

  if (number == 100000)
  { 
  cout << endl;
  cout << "count complete";
  system("pause");
  exit(1);
  }
  system("pause");
  return 0;
}



Is This A Good Question/Topic? 0
  • +

Replies To: Desktop vs laptops(both running windows)

#2 Autocrat   User is offline

  • D.I.C Regular
  • member icon

Reputation: 4
  • View blog
  • Posts: 307
  • Joined: 27-September 09

Re: Desktop vs laptops(both running windows)

Posted 05 September 2010 - 12:16 AM

This test is useless. Even if the OS is same, you have different background apps running which affect the memory and CPU usage. The only way to tell which is faster is by looking at the specs. Desktops are in general more powerful as they have capacity for expansion like addition of better GC's, RAM sticks and stuff. Laptops on the other hand are almost impossible to upgrade. CPUs are often built in and can't be changed. GC's can't be changed.

You can check which is powerful by simply looking at the specs. A laptop with a better processor will definitely beat a desktop with a slower one.

In a nutshell, desktop/laptop is just a form factor. You can compare their sizes, not their power.
Was This Post Helpful? -1
  • +
  • -

#3 AhmerjavedC++   User is offline

  • D.I.C Regular

Reputation: 0
  • View blog
  • Posts: 253
  • Joined: 02-October 09

Re: Desktop vs laptops(both running windows)

Posted 05 September 2010 - 12:29 AM

Laptops are customizable if you know how to. LAPTOPS are customizable.. I have done it. Sure you cant change the CPU.. But you can add RAM depending on the motherboard. Look at the specs i gave. my desktop only has 1.18GB of ram and my laptop has much more ram.. OS does not matter at all. I re-ran tests with out any apps running and the same amount of processes in the background results are the same.. What could be the factors surrounding this. ofcourse Autocrat you would not know (no offense). C++ programs run by using the physical memory ram/cpu. and that does measure speed. my point is that this is not a useless test.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#4 moopet   User is offline

  • binary decision maker
  • member icon

Reputation: 345
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1,190
  • Joined: 02-April 09

Re: Desktop vs laptops(both running windows)

Posted 05 September 2010 - 01:16 AM

Misinformation: you can change the CPU in most laptops. The exceptions being things like ultraportables or Apples.

The differences between laptop performance and desktop performance for what appear to be the same or similar specs can be explained by realising that the mobile version of a processor is a different product to the deskop version. It's designed to run with lower power consumption and generate less heat, for starters. This is why your laptop doesn't come with a 4 inch fan bolted onto the top. Probably wouldn't sell too well. Everything else in the laptop suffers the same limitation with heat flow. The teeny tiny motherboard has a teeny tiny north and south bridge which can't overheat, likely a lower FSB speed, memory speed and so forth. Laptop peripherals drag the system down too, for example a standard 2.5" hard drive spins at 5400 RPM as opposed to 7200 or 10000 in your desktop, slowing down every physical disk request.

There's more to it. They're just not comparable by the numbers on the box, is all. Don't feel bad, the laptop outperforms the desktop in other ways - it's got battery backup for when the power fails and you can carry it into coffee shops without looking like a freak.
Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#5 AhmerjavedC++   User is offline

  • D.I.C Regular

Reputation: 0
  • View blog
  • Posts: 253
  • Joined: 02-October 09

Re: Desktop vs laptops(both running windows)

Posted 05 September 2010 - 08:09 AM

Thank you Moopet for the Information!!
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#6 Autocrat   User is offline

  • D.I.C Regular
  • member icon

Reputation: 4
  • View blog
  • Posts: 307
  • Joined: 27-September 09

Re: Desktop vs laptops(both running windows)

Posted 06 September 2010 - 05:55 AM

View Postmoopet, on 05 September 2010 - 12:16 PM, said:

Misinformation: you can change the CPU in most laptops. The exceptions being things like ultraportables or Apples.

The differences between laptop performance and desktop performance for what appear to be the same or similar specs can be explained by realising that the mobile version of a processor is a different product to the deskop version. It's designed to run with lower power consumption and generate less heat, for starters. This is why your laptop doesn't come with a 4 inch fan bolted onto the top. Probably wouldn't sell too well. Everything else in the laptop suffers the same limitation with heat flow. The teeny tiny motherboard has a teeny tiny north and south bridge which can't overheat, likely a lower FSB speed, memory speed and so forth. Laptop peripherals drag the system down too, for example a standard 2.5" hard drive spins at 5400 RPM as opposed to 7200 or 10000 in your desktop, slowing down every physical disk request.

There's more to it. They're just not comparable by the numbers on the box, is all. Don't feel bad, the laptop outperforms the desktop in other ways - it's got battery backup for when the power fails and you can carry it into coffee shops without looking like a freak.

You seem to be concentrating more on the advantages/disadvantages of laptops (underlined), which are not asked for here.

About the RPM part, SSD's are meant to tackle this limitation which are now available on laptops as well. Why shouldn't I regard this as misinformation?

About the CPU part, I don't agree with you. Most have a built in CPU and most have a separate one also, yet this limitation can't be ignored. Most Compaq laptop motherboards I have seen have a built in CPU.

Yet you are also ignoring that these limitations are not what the OP has asked. He is trying to see if the same specs in a laptop would serve you better or the same ones in a desktop. However, he has not bothered to see that there is a vast difference between the specs of the three machines. A really stupid test indeed!
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#7 moopet   User is offline

  • binary decision maker
  • member icon

Reputation: 345
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1,190
  • Joined: 02-April 09

Re: Desktop vs laptops(both running windows)

Posted 06 September 2010 - 07:36 AM

View PostAutocrat, on 06 September 2010 - 11:55 AM, said:

You seem to be concentrating more on the advantages/disadvantages of laptops (underlined), which are not asked for here.

About the RPM part, SSD's are meant to tackle this limitation which are now available on laptops as well. Why shouldn't I regard this as misinformation?

This is quite true. However, I'm generalising, as I've indicated, and spinny-spinny hard drives are still by far the most abundant.

View PostAutocrat, on 06 September 2010 - 11:55 AM, said:

About the CPU part, I don't agree with you. Most have a built in CPU and most have a separate one also, yet this limitation can't be ignored.

I'm not sure I follow. Most laptops have a built in CPU AND a separate one? Are you sure that's what you meant to type?

View PostAutocrat, on 06 September 2010 - 11:55 AM, said:

Most Compaq laptop motherboards I have seen have a built in CPU.

I haven't taken many apart in the last year or so, but I did spend about 4 years working as a laptop repair technician and can say that I very rarely saw any machine with a non-replaceable CPU.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#8 Autocrat   User is offline

  • D.I.C Regular
  • member icon

Reputation: 4
  • View blog
  • Posts: 307
  • Joined: 27-September 09

Re: Desktop vs laptops(both running windows)

Posted 06 September 2010 - 10:11 AM

View Postmoopet, on 06 September 2010 - 06:36 PM, said:

View PostAutocrat, on 06 September 2010 - 11:55 AM, said:

About the CPU part, I don't agree with you. Most have a built in CPU and most have a separate one also, yet this limitation can't be ignored.

I'm not sure I follow. Most laptops have a built in CPU AND a separate one? Are you sure that's what you meant to type?

Ermm!! Sorry, a typo! Wanted to say that most have a built in also.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

Page 1 of 1