We’re not the first to be criticised by certain AMD supporters. They argue that we’re biased towards Intel because of the lower review scores we usually give AMD-based equipment. And yes, the review scores are lower, but there should be no question of any bias – we desperately want AMD to start succeeding.

Every processor launch, platform arrival or big announcement sees our ears perk up like a dog that’s heard its master rattling its bowl, but we’re perpetually left with our tail between our legs when we actually get our hands on the products to put them through our rigorous tests.

One of AMD’s press relations agencies contacted us to offer a straight comparison – one machine with Intel, one with AMD – suggesting enthusiastically that AMD’s mobile platform had been misconstrued, and it was synthetic benchmarks (those that don’t require user input, like 3DMark) that had shaped our opinion on AMD.

Run real world benchmarks on the machines, we were told, and we’d soon see the difference. Well, we privately guffawed at the thought of AMD’s Turion X2 architecture besting the venerable Centrino platform, and then gratefully accepted their offer.

After all, they wouldn’t have offered if there hadn’t been something in it, right?

Test 1: Boot

Real world test number one, then. One of the most annoying things about owning a PC is the time it takes to get going; what could be more real than that as an initial test? Nothing.

And AMD, sadly, has dropped its chips in a puddle on this one. From a complete shut down to the appearance of the flashing cursor on the Vista Basic log-in screen, the Centrino machine took 38 seconds, while the Turion bumbled away for an additional 19 seconds, coming in at 0:58.

It did, however, manage to pull some seconds back when we then tried a cold restart, taking 1:16 (against Intel’s 1:08) to make it back to the password prompt. These being laptops, you’re just as likely to be returning them from sleep mode as you are to be booting them up from cold.

The Turion managed a fully respectable 24 seconds when entering sleep mode from the Vista desktop, and an eerily similar 24 seconds to wake itself back up again.

We’d like to confirm that we think this is a perfectly fine lick of speed, just in case any sensitive AMD fans are reading. Thirty seconds would be fine. But when the Centrino manages to enter sleep mode in 10 seconds and wake up in 19, we have to give this to the Intel platform.

Winner: Centrino

Test 2: Battery

Continuing the real world theme, here’s some advice for aspiring laptop owners: don’t buy either of these machines if your intention is to use them on the move; not only are they monstrously heavy, they appear to have one rechargeable AA battery’s worth of portable power.

And establishing a new theme of using synthetic benchmarks while cackling at the thought that we wouldn’t, we enlisted the help of a wonderful benchmark called Battery Eater, which taxed the CPU, hard drive and graphics unit until each laptop gave up and shut down.

AMD’s machine lasted a paltry one hour 11 minutes, while Intel clung on to do one hour 34, but these extra 23 minutes don’t represent a real victory by any means – both scores are weak. The clumsily lit 17inch panel on these Inspirons was unlikely to have helped.

Winner: Centrino

Test 3: Graphics

Ah, here’s the ace in AMD’s hole – graphics. Collaboration with seemingly revitalised sister company ATI has seen AMD move towards a united platform model, where it creates processors, chipsets and graphics units that are actively designed to work well together.

Regardless of whether the plan works out in the end, it also means we’re seeing some excellent graphics technology being shoehorned into the chipset; the integrated 1270 inside the Turion machine should see AMD sailing through against Intel’s bog standard X3100 chipset. And it does! But not by much.

Cinebench (yes it’s synthetic, but we like it) rated the AMD’s OpenGL performance at 711 points, which Intel missed by a small margin. Visibly, though, the AMD results were much better; viewing the test with two identical screens shows that there’s a clear amount of extra processing power going on inside that ATI chipset.

Winner: Turion

Test 4: Gaming

With all the extra graphical goodness on AMD’s plate well and truly established, it was time to move back to the real world.

Or the bullet-filled world of paranormal shenanigans that is 2005’s FEAR, to be more precise; not the freshest of gaming morsels, but anyone expecting us to attempt a Crysis benchmark on these sub-£500 laptops has another think coming.

At the lower ends of the game’s performance settings, the ATI chipset retains its lead from the last round; all decadent and well-lit, with an average framerate in the 80s, it pummels Intel’s performance by a good 30fps.

Sadly, when pushing the graphics past the archaic 640 x 480 resolution, things start to go pear shaped for both machines; both manage scores around the 16fps mark when running in medium graphics mode and half that when running at high detail.

Despite the drop in framerate, though, the ATi card runs roughshod over this round. All this performance in the face of Intel’s undeniably hefty processor is a definite plus for AMD here.

Winner: Turion

Test 5: Price

Well, wouldn’t you know it? This heated contest has reached a final, deciding stage.

And it’s our unutterable pleasure to declare AMD the winner, since it undercuts Intel on price by nearly £50. But this is a slim victory; the Intel is the more responsive machine, the nicer machine to use day to day.

If you’re buying a lowcost laptop for work purposes, or just to browse the Internet, we’d recommend the slick mechanics of the Intel machine every time. But if you’re foolhardy enough to want to play three-year-old games on a bottom-of-the-barrel PC, you’re better off looking AMD’s way.

Problem is, you do have another option. Save up for just a little bit longer, put in an extra couple of hundred pounds, and grab a laptop with a better processor and meatier graphics on board, one which might even let you near some reasonably fresh games.

Neither of these machines is a gaming laptop; so the fact one of them does a reasonable job is neither here nor there.

Overall winner: Turion