Q: Why don't desktops us mobile cpus?

"Um hello?!!!! 'Displosal' is a huge problem. Out of sight out of mind
eh?"
What the heck does using a mobile CPU versus a cheap P4 have to do with
disposal?

When reading a thread of posts try to stay ON TOPIC or within the SCOPE of
the convo.



"JAD" wrote in message
...

"ISOHaven" wrote in message
...
I think a direct answer to your question is:
The reason they don't make very many mobile CPUs for desktops is because
there is NO MARKET for it. Take a look around, is anyone else asking
this question? No.

Mobile CPUs are designed to be mobile. Not stationary. I just read
through this entire post and I still don't even know why you care? Why
are you doing this? What is your point? I heard some talk about
computer companies needing to be more green. What the heck is that crap
all about? Noise? I seriously doubt computer noise is affecting the
environment. Heat? I think the other equipment in your house generate
more heat, not sure what the point is here. Power, well, see below.

Um hello?!!!! 'Displosal' is a huge problem. Out of sight out of mind
eh?


Buying a mobile cpu versus a cheap P4 is not going to change your bank
account very much and it's NOT going to change your electric bill either.

If you are doing this just because "you want to" then your first answer
by Paul was the end of this convo.

If all you need to do is "surf AOL/MSN, email, print pictures, balance
the checkbook, maybe play music and video" then go buy yourself a $300
Linspire machine and REALLY save yourself some money.

Seems like you're splitting hairs here for no good reason.



"jaster" wrote in message
m...
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 08:00:20 +0000, kony thoughtfully wrote:

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 02:45:18 GMT, jaster wrote:

I know the motherboards are different but is there a reason why desktop
computer aren't built to use mobile cpus?

Because mobile CPUs are usually optimized for low power consumption,
not
performance. It matters far more when one needs it to run off a
battery.

Exactly why cpu and motherboard manufacturers should consider mobile
cpus.

If we're only considering green-ideals, then we can't very well focus
on
only a CPU, would have to consider why people drive big SUVs, or buy
large TVs, etc, etc, etc. They don't because they don't anticipate the
effects to matter in their lifetime.

Not really reverent to discussion because most people buy complete PCs
not
just the components. Like buying a car you simply make sure the car
engine is adequate for your needs but you don't buy a GM engines for a
Volkswagon cars.


I assume desktop and mobile are about the same performance for the
average user,

Then you'd be assuming wrong. Pentium - M is an unexpectedly good
performer but this has a lot to do with perspective too, as P4 isn't
nearly as good as Intel would have you believe if you start benching it
on the older/typical applications everyone's running, not the new
high-end professional stuff optimized for a P4.

mobile cpus are capable enough to run 99% of the games available,

"Capable" is rather arbitrary... The slowest desktop CPU of any (then
current) generation is also fairly capable of runing games, and yet
that's not usually what people would prefer for gaming.


That's my point. Joe and Jane Average use a home/office PC
good enough to surf AOL/MSN, email, print pictures, balance the
checkbook,
maybe play music and video. Upgrades come when Joe or Jane
needs to run some software that won't work on the current system or the
HD
fills up.

and mobile cpus run cooler and more efficient than desktop
cpus.

Yes, but don't forget "more expensive". I would buy a Pentium-M system
before a P4, but remember that for desktop usage, most people don't
need
anything new, their fairly low requirements would run fine on their
current system- if only that system keeps running. If it breaks
they'll
tend to want the cheapest thing that gets them a system that works, and
that isn't usually one with a mobile CPU in it.

They prefer lower cost over power savings, or simply buy OEM, when an
OEM will also prefer cost savings, especially since that OEM is not
paying the power bill to run the system.


OEMs have the same issue as Joe and Jane Average. There are few
motherboards using mobile (OEM) cpus, so they use regular motherboards
with desktop chips.



I'm not talking about bleeding edge computing but about the average
user
happy running XP home on anything from 1-2.4mhz cpu. Wouldn't a
Centrino or Turino work ? Could I pop an AMD64 Turino into a desktop
motherboard?

Yes, it would work. It'd still be more expensive, including a
specialty
motherboard that costs more per unit due to selling in lower volume.
Truth is, after all is said and done the cost to an OEM between one CPU
and another is less than all the other expenses, to get an otherwise
same system with a mobile CPU at same price, the system would be FAR
slower.

Yes currently looks like 17% more than an AMD desktop cpu of the same
speed but is that because of manufacturing quantity, ie, fewer chips
made?


Even so, if one doesnt' need the performance why would they get a
mobile
CPU at all instead of a Via CPU? Much cheaper, it suits the
requirement
but the technically uninclined will end up deferring to some
techno-whiz
that suggests the highest performance instead.

In summary, if one is only doing basic things on their system, the
question is not "why not a mobile CPU", it's "why buy anything at all,
instead of continuing to use their current system"... and that is what
most do, there are many people with sub-1GHz systems that find them
sufficient.

My question was not whether to get by on older or mobile cpus but more
of why aren't manufacturers focused on making mobile cpus instead of
desktop cpus. Since mobiles are more efficient and greener than
desktop
cpus. I think nospam (Paul) has the right idea which is they've
invested
research in desktop cpu m/bs but not yet mobile cpu m/bs.

ISOHaven wrote:
"Um hello?!!!! 'Displosal' is a huge problem. Out of sight out of mind
eh?"
What the heck does using a mobile CPU versus a cheap P4 have to do with
disposal?

When reading a thread of posts try to stay ON TOPIC or within the SCOPE of
the convo.

Duh, what's a "convo" ?? I shore knows how to critizize others
spelang neeerk.



"JAD" wrote in message
...

"ISOHaven" wrote in message
.. .

I think a direct answer to your question is:
The reason they don't make very many mobile CPUs for desktops is because
there is NO MARKET for it. Take a look around, is anyone else asking
this question? No.

Mobile CPUs are designed to be mobile. Not stationary. I just read
through this entire post and I still don't even know why you care? Why
are you doing this? What is your point? I heard some talk about
computer companies needing to be more green. What the heck is that crap
all about? Noise? I seriously doubt computer noise is affecting the
environment. Heat? I think the other equipment in your house generate
more heat, not sure what the point is here. Power, well, see below.

Um hello?!!!! 'Displosal' is a huge problem. Out of sight out of mind
eh?


Buying a mobile cpu versus a cheap P4 is not going to change your bank
account very much and it's NOT going to change your electric bill either.

If you are doing this just because "you want to" then your first answer
by Paul was the end of this convo.

If all you need to do is "surf AOL/MSN, email, print pictures, balance
the checkbook, maybe play music and video" then go buy yourself a $300
Linspire machine and REALLY save yourself some money.

Seems like you're splitting hairs here for no good reason.



"jaster" wrote in message
.com...

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 08:00:20 +0000, kony thoughtfully wrote:


On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 02:45:18 GMT, jaster wrote:


I know the motherboards are different but is there a reason why desktop
computer aren't built to use mobile cpus?

Because mobile CPUs are usually optimized for low power consumption,
not
performance. It matters far more when one needs it to run off a
battery.

Exactly why cpu and motherboard manufacturers should consider mobile
cpus.


If we're only considering green-ideals, then we can't very well focus
on
only a CPU, would have to consider why people drive big SUVs, or buy
large TVs, etc, etc, etc. They don't because they don't anticipate the
effects to matter in their lifetime.

Not really reverent to discussion because most people buy complete PCs
not
just the components. Like buying a car you simply make sure the car
engine is adequate for your needs but you don't buy a GM engines for a
Volkswagon cars.



I assume desktop and mobile are about the same performance for the
average user,

Then you'd be assuming wrong. Pentium - M is an unexpectedly good
performer but this has a lot to do with perspective too, as P4 isn't
nearly as good as Intel would have you believe if you start benching it
on the older/typical applications everyone's running, not the new
high-end professional stuff optimized for a P4.


mobile cpus are capable enough to run 99% of the games available,

"Capable" is rather arbitrary... The slowest desktop CPU of any (then
current) generation is also fairly capable of runing games, and yet
that's not usually what people would prefer for gaming.


That's my point. Joe and Jane Average use a home/office PC
good enough to surf AOL/MSN, email, print pictures, balance the
checkbook,
maybe play music and video. Upgrades come when Joe or Jane
needs to run some software that won't work on the current system or the
HD
fills up.


and mobile cpus run cooler and more efficient than desktop
cpus.

Yes, but don't forget "more expensive". I would buy a Pentium-M system
before a P4, but remember that for desktop usage, most people don't
need
anything new, their fairly low requirements would run fine on their
current system- if only that system keeps running. If it breaks
they'll
tend to want the cheapest thing that gets them a system that works, and
that isn't usually one with a mobile CPU in it.

They prefer lower cost over power savings, or simply buy OEM, when an
OEM will also prefer cost savings, especially since that OEM is not
paying the power bill to run the system.


OEMs have the same issue as Joe and Jane Average. There are few
motherboards using mobile (OEM) cpus, so they use regular motherboards
with desktop chips.



I'm not talking about bleeding edge computing but about the average
user
happy running XP home on anything from 1-2.4mhz cpu. Wouldn't a
Centrino or Turino work ? Could I pop an AMD64 Turino into a desktop
motherboard?

Yes, it would work. It'd still be more expensive, including a
specialty
motherboard that costs more per unit due to selling in lower volume.
Truth is, after all is said and done the cost to an OEM between one CPU
and another is less than all the other expenses, to get an otherwise
same system with a mobile CPU at same price, the system would be FAR
slower.

Yes currently looks like 17% more than an AMD desktop cpu of the same
speed but is that because of manufacturing quantity, ie, fewer chips
made?


Even so, if one doesnt' need the performance why would they get a
mobile
CPU at all instead of a Via CPU? Much cheaper, it suits the
requirement
but the technically uninclined will end up deferring to some
techno-whiz
that suggests the highest performance instead.

In summary, if one is only doing basic things on their system, the
question is not "why not a mobile CPU", it's "why buy anything at all,
instead of continuing to use their current system"... and that is what
most do, there are many people with sub-1GHz systems that find them
sufficient.

My question was not whether to get by on older or mobile cpus but more
of why aren't manufacturers focused on making mobile cpus instead of
desktop cpus. Since mobiles are more efficient and greener than
desktop
cpus. I think nospam (Paul) has the right idea which is they've
invested
research in desktop cpu m/bs but not yet mobile cpu m/bs.








--


Gargravarr
_________________________________________________

"One of the major problems of time travel is... one of grammer."

**The Restaurant at the End of the Universe**

"ISOHaven" wrote in message
...
Buying a mobile cpu versus a cheap P4 is not going to change your bank
account very much and it's NOT going to change your electric bill either.

If you are doing this just because "you want to" then your first answer by
Paul was the end of this convo.

If all you need to do is "surf AOL/MSN, email, print pictures, balance the
checkbook, maybe play music and video" then go buy yourself a $300
Linspire machine and REALLY save yourself some money.

Seems like you're splitting hairs here for no good reason.

Really? A mobile CPU system will run on a 60W power supply and typically use
30W or less (excluding monitor). What's a desktop machine use? Mutliply that
by a million P4 room heaters and you've saved a lot of power.

Michael

Are you feeling alright?

Michael C wrote:
"ISOHaven" wrote in message
...

Buying a mobile cpu versus a cheap P4 is not going to change your bank
account very much and it's NOT going to change your electric bill either.

If you are doing this just because "you want to" then your first answer by
Paul was the end of this convo.

If all you need to do is "surf AOL/MSN, email, print pictures, balance the
checkbook, maybe play music and video" then go buy yourself a $300
Linspire machine and REALLY save yourself some money.

Seems like you're splitting hairs here for no good reason.


Really? A mobile CPU system will run on a 60W power supply and typically use
30W or less (excluding monitor). What's a desktop machine use? Mutliply that
by a million P4 room heaters and you've saved a lot of power.

Michael



Why all the discussion and gnashing of teeth concerning power
consumption of a typical P4 PC?

A typical desktop computer draws about 60 Watts of power; a
conventional CRT monitor adds another 50 Watts. When in
power-saving mode, however, a typical computer only draws about
5 Watts.

Guess what folks, that's approximately equivalent to one (1) 100
watt light-bulb. At present day hydro prices, that means that
it would cost approximately 24 cents a day to operate a PC and
monitor if they were on for the full 24 hours or, approximately
88 dollars per year.

Want it to cost nothing?? Turn off a couple of incandescent
lamps. Same idea goes for every room that a PC is used in.
Throw away a few toasters, electric kettles and other useless
appliances and you'll actually *save* money.

Point being, computers are not pigs when it comes to power
consumption. Think of it... toaster or electric kettle? 1500
Watts. Computer system 110 Watts, 55 Watts in sleep mode. P4
room heaters, psshaaw.


--


Gargravarr
_________________________________________________

"One of the major problems of time travel is... one of grammer."

**The Restaurant at the End of the Universe**

Not sure what your exact point was. All you did was just put a laptop on
someones desk. In that case then this entire thread is BS. If you want a
crappy HDD and you want a crappy cd type drive and no expansion what-so-ever
then YES your 60/30W example will hold true. But then again just buy a
friggen laptop and use that instead of a desktop unit.

BUT, that's not the case. The question at hand is building a DESKTOP unit
with a mobile processor that needs to run 12v cd type drives and 12v HDDs.
So your 60/30W example goes right out the window. Sorry, try again.

Now if this guy would like to come back and say he wants to build his
machine out of 100% laptop parts then I believe the average response will be
to tell this guy to go buy a laptop.


"Michael C" wrote in message
...
"ISOHaven" wrote in message
...
Buying a mobile cpu versus a cheap P4 is not going to change your bank
account very much and it's NOT going to change your electric bill either.

If you are doing this just because "you want to" then your first answer
by Paul was the end of this convo.

If all you need to do is "surf AOL/MSN, email, print pictures, balance
the checkbook, maybe play music and video" then go buy yourself a $300
Linspire machine and REALLY save yourself some money.

Seems like you're splitting hairs here for no good reason.

Really? A mobile CPU system will run on a 60W power supply and typically
use 30W or less (excluding monitor). What's a desktop machine use?
Mutliply that by a million P4 room heaters and you've saved a lot of
power.

Michael

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 20:04:42 +0000, kony thoughtfully wrote:

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 18:26:01 GMT, jaster wrote:

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 08:00:20 +0000, kony thoughtfully wrote:

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 02:45:18 GMT, jaster wrote:

I know the motherboards are different but is there a reason why desktop
computer aren't built to use mobile cpus?

Because mobile CPUs are usually optimized for low power consumption,
not performance. It matters far more when one needs it to run off a
battery.

Exactly why cpu and motherboard manufacturers should consider mobile
cpus.

Actually that is exactly why they wouldn't, because they're (desktops) not
running off battery power the vast majority of the time.


I think you're stuck in a "it's a desktop stupid" line of thought. Maybe
I should have asked why are there desktop cpus now that there are mobile
cpus. I think there is a huge market for desktops. Some people are
making laptops their next PC, some even buy docking stations and monitors
for their laptops. So if Intel/AMD stopped making "desktop" cpus and only
manufactured "mobile" cpus what would be the loss?



[snip]

Not really reverent to discussion

[snip]
I see now you're not asking "why not" at all, you're just trying to argue
their benefits as if it makes any difference... which it doesn't, even if
your points are valid (and some are), it makes no difference as to why
they aren't used, those are not the factors others are considering.

As I said in another post VIA lead the way in quiet and cool cpus but AMD
now leads the field. It is worth considering especially since there is
a reference model for $100 laptops run off a hand crank.


[snip]

True, and many people don't need the fastest system available at any point
and time, so they keep using their current system, not buying a new one
with mobile CPU. When the time comes to upgrade again, then they will get
more performance per $ without a mobile CPU, or if you argue they don't
need the performance, they will still get a lower cost system without the
mobile CPU. Any way you look at it, the choice is lower power or lower
cost.

Most don't need the fast system available as long as it runs
the software you use and most mobile cpus can run most software. Cost is
irreverent if you're a purchaser of bleeding edge technology, like the
newest cpu and graphics card available. I wait 6 months and what
cost $300 now costs $150 and it's the same computing power it was 6 months
earlier.


[snip]

It should not be a difficult thing to make a mobile desktop board, but
there has to be the perception that the market would buy sufficient
quantity. That's a gamble... are you willing to finance that gamble?
It's a hard thing to predict new trends.

The market will buy anything the manufacturers sell if they think they
need it, before there were mobiles everyone had desktops now many have
laptops. Desktops are modular not so much laptops but for
general computing laptop cpus can do the same job as desktop cpus.

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 11:29:45 -0800, ISOHaven thoughtfully wrote:

I think a direct answer to your question is: The reason they don't make
very many mobile CPUs for desktops is because there is NO MARKET for it.
Take a look around, is anyone else asking this question? No.

Well someone has to be first.

Mobile CPUs are designed to be mobile. Not stationary. I just read
through this entire post and I still don't even know why you care? Why
are you doing this? What is your point? I heard some talk about computer
companies needing to be more green. What the heck is that crap all about?
Noise? I seriously doubt computer noise is affecting the environment.
Heat? I think the other equipment in your house generate more heat, not
sure what the point is here. Power, well, see below.


You haven't been in the newsgroups much otherwise you'd have read all the
posts about heating and noise. Laptops don't seem to have those issues.

Buying a mobile cpu versus a cheap P4 is not going to change your bank
account very much and it's NOT going to change your electric bill either.

If you are doing this just because "you want to" then your first answer by
Paul was the end of this convo.

If all you need to do is "surf AOL/MSN, email, print pictures, balance the
checkbook, maybe play music and video" then go buy yourself a $300
Linspire machine and REALLY save yourself some money.

Seems like you're splitting hairs here for no good reason.


My money and computing is irreverent as to why AMD and Intel continue to
produce "desktop" cpus. I understand for use in workstations and servers
but not for Joe and Jane Average. If Intel only produces "mobile" type
cpus everyone would buy "mobile" cpus and motherboards.

Youngsters don't remember that early PCs were developed and
manufactured only for office use and enthusiasts who could obtain PCs
until Flight Simulator, Sinclair and Apple opened the market. S

"ISOHaven" wrote in message
...
"Um hello?!!!! 'Displosal' is a huge problem. Out of sight out of mind
eh?"
What the heck does using a mobile CPU versus a cheap P4 have to do with
disposal?

When reading a thread of posts try to stay ON TOPIC or within the SCOPE of
the convo.



"JAD" wrote in message
...

"ISOHaven" wrote in message
...
I think a direct answer to your question is:
The reason they don't make very many mobile CPUs for desktops is because
there is NO MARKET for it. Take a look around, is anyone else asking
this question? No.

Mobile CPUs are designed to be mobile. Not stationary. I just read
through this entire post and I still don't even know why you care? Why
are you doing this? What is your point? I heard some talk about
computer companies needing to be more green. What the heck is that crap
all about? Noise? I seriously doubt computer noise is affecting the
environment. Heat? I think the other equipment in your house generate
more heat, not sure what the point is here. Power, well, see below.



HELLOOOOOOOOO you brought it up ...you know..... YOUR 'GREEN' comment.
Hows about you remembering what you post?




Um hello?!!!! 'Displosal' is a huge problem. Out of sight out of mind
eh?


Buying a mobile cpu versus a cheap P4 is not going to change your bank
account very much and it's NOT going to change your electric bill
either.

If you are doing this just because "you want to" then your first answer
by Paul was the end of this convo.

If all you need to do is "surf AOL/MSN, email, print pictures, balance
the checkbook, maybe play music and video" then go buy yourself a $300
Linspire machine and REALLY save yourself some money.

Seems like you're splitting hairs here for no good reason.



"jaster" wrote in message
m...
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 08:00:20 +0000, kony thoughtfully wrote:

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 02:45:18 GMT, jaster wrote:

I know the motherboards are different but is there a reason why
desktop
computer aren't built to use mobile cpus?

Because mobile CPUs are usually optimized for low power consumption,
not
performance. It matters far more when one needs it to run off a
battery.

Exactly why cpu and motherboard manufacturers should consider mobile
cpus.

If we're only considering green-ideals, then we can't very well focus
on
only a CPU, would have to consider why people drive big SUVs, or buy
large TVs, etc, etc, etc. They don't because they don't anticipate
the
effects to matter in their lifetime.

Not really reverent to discussion because most people buy complete PCs
not
just the components. Like buying a car you simply make sure the car
engine is adequate for your needs but you don't buy a GM engines for a
Volkswagon cars.


I assume desktop and mobile are about the same performance for the
average user,

Then you'd be assuming wrong. Pentium - M is an unexpectedly good
performer but this has a lot to do with perspective too, as P4 isn't
nearly as good as Intel would have you believe if you start benching
it
on the older/typical applications everyone's running, not the new
high-end professional stuff optimized for a P4.

mobile cpus are capable enough to run 99% of the games available,

"Capable" is rather arbitrary... The slowest desktop CPU of any (then
current) generation is also fairly capable of runing games, and yet
that's not usually what people would prefer for gaming.


That's my point. Joe and Jane Average use a home/office PC
good enough to surf AOL/MSN, email, print pictures, balance the
checkbook,
maybe play music and video. Upgrades come when Joe or Jane
needs to run some software that won't work on the current system or the
HD
fills up.

and mobile cpus run cooler and more efficient than desktop
cpus.

Yes, but don't forget "more expensive". I would buy a Pentium-M
system
before a P4, but remember that for desktop usage, most people don't
need
anything new, their fairly low requirements would run fine on their
current system- if only that system keeps running. If it breaks
they'll
tend to want the cheapest thing that gets them a system that works,
and
that isn't usually one with a mobile CPU in it.

They prefer lower cost over power savings, or simply buy OEM, when an
OEM will also prefer cost savings, especially since that OEM is not
paying the power bill to run the system.


OEMs have the same issue as Joe and Jane Average. There are few
motherboards using mobile (OEM) cpus, so they use regular motherboards
with desktop chips.



I'm not talking about bleeding edge computing but about the average
user
happy running XP home on anything from 1-2.4mhz cpu. Wouldn't a
Centrino or Turino work ? Could I pop an AMD64 Turino into a desktop
motherboard?

Yes, it would work. It'd still be more expensive, including a
specialty
motherboard that costs more per unit due to selling in lower volume.
Truth is, after all is said and done the cost to an OEM between one
CPU
and another is less than all the other expenses, to get an otherwise
same system with a mobile CPU at same price, the system would be FAR
slower.

Yes currently looks like 17% more than an AMD desktop cpu of the same
speed but is that because of manufacturing quantity, ie, fewer chips
made?


Even so, if one doesnt' need the performance why would they get a
mobile
CPU at all instead of a Via CPU? Much cheaper, it suits the
requirement
but the technically uninclined will end up deferring to some
techno-whiz
that suggests the highest performance instead.

In summary, if one is only doing basic things on their system, the
question is not "why not a mobile CPU", it's "why buy anything at all,
instead of continuing to use their current system"... and that is what
most do, there are many people with sub-1GHz systems that find them
sufficient.

My question was not whether to get by on older or mobile cpus but more
of why aren't manufacturers focused on making mobile cpus instead of
desktop cpus. Since mobiles are more efficient and greener than
desktop
cpus. I think nospam (Paul) has the right idea which is they've
invested
research in desktop cpu m/bs but not yet mobile cpu m/bs.

"HELLOOOOOOOOO you brought it up ...you know..... YOUR 'GREEN' comment.
Hows about you remembering what you post?"

My green comment eh? So did you read the word green then stop reading?
What came after that? Noise, Heat and Power?
Maybe you should read ALL of what someone says before you attempt to speak.
I used the term GREEN in the context of this thread. You failed to stay
within the context of this thread and you still didn't answer my question.
So I guess even you are lost.

Maybe you should quit now before you dig an even deeper hole. Oh wait...let
me guess your replys are going to get nastier and nastier (along with dumber
and dumber) until this turns in to a **** fit....hum....