Processor Comparison

I was just what are the actual statistics on the comparison between a Sempron 2600+ (1.6GhZ) and the Atom (1.6Ghz) CPU?

Is the Atom CPU actually faster, despite it using less energy?

 

No, it's much, much slower. The Atom chip is insanely slow. It's even slower than the 900 Mhz Celeron in the Asus Eee 900. Then again, it uses ~5w, which is about 1/12th the power of the average light bulb. It's slow as molasses, but it supports hyperthreading, which is nice. It's not meant for desktop applications, or to be compared to desktop processors, unless they're around 10 years old.

That being said, it runs Linpus just fine, and handles XP alright from what I hear. Don't even bother with Vista though, it doesn't even meet the minimum processor speed.

 

If you want an Hypersonic Pc, you don't buy an aspire One. If you want a good computer , with a good linux software , excellent portability and a design like no other. Aspire One is for you

 

Ok, so it's like what... PIII 900mhz? or even slower? Can anyone post a benchmark comparison test?

 

Just Google it, Sunshine. That benchmarking has been done long ago already.... :geek:

 

Vista works great, only the SSD is making trouble without mods.

 

duh!!
well, it's almost like the results were in here
I just feel sorry that (looks like) even assus is going for a slower chip just because it's like half the power consumption :x

 

No, rjm, the CPU is much slower than a Pentium M, but as equivalent as a Pentium 3 Mobile running at the same speed.

 

Ok, I googled it and guess what...

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=110&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=40

We have something like P III 800Mhz - P IV 1.1Ghz inside the One :shock:

 

which is actually much faster than a 900mhz celeron...

 

yeah, but it is not any much faster.

 

If you purchased a One (or any netbook) for its processor performance, I think you missed the whole point.

 

Lawl, thats soo true!

 

Okey, of course it's true, but what about knowing what you have?

Finally I've found a One in store (about 15 "no's" and only 1 "yes"), and I must say I was amazed with it's 720p (1280x720) video capabilities. Does any <1.8Mhz processor plays it that smooth?

I think this little Atom is perfect enough for me

 

Hang on, this is all getting a bit crazy,

At what ... super PI?

Look, in no regard whatsoever does a Aspire One perform in the real world like a PIIIm notebook, even one hypotheically clocked to 1.6Ghz! Its faster to use than my old X31, which was 1.3ghz Banias, and (the platform) has the same integrated graphics that came with Dothan - Dothan was also pretty commonly found at 1.6 Ghz so I think in terms of speed, responsivity, and capability, a Dothan Pentium M notebook is a reasonable "benchmark" to give people an idea of how much "computer" they are getting when they buy a A1. If the CPU is a little slower, the memory and disc subsystems are faster to ake up for it.

We can split hairs about whether that's a bit of an overestimate, but basically its ballpart correct. It's much less misleading than looking at a pure CPU speed test, show the atom coming in last, and infering a computer with an atom PC is going to be dog slow.

 

my linux 120gb hd model boots in 10-15seconds.

 

SSD version boots in 8 seconds for me, the processor is fast enough to run the type of apps this device should be running - although I'm sure i'll be moaning soon enough when it comes to compiling on it for work due in at uni

 

I'm sure we will all be going ooooooohhhhhh and aaaaaaaahhhhhh when the Dual core atoms start coming out in 4th quarter of 08.
For now, the 1.6 ghz atom is good for what it was originally designed to do. Just the basics.

 

uhhh it runs Vista great, I even installed a full OEM version of basic first time around and that too ran great...