Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Intel's New Atom D510 Benchmark Tested

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 4 years ago | from the needs-more-than-new dept.

Intel 86

adeelarshad82 writes "The Atom processor in nettops and netbooks is one of Intel's success stories for 2009. Recently PCMag put the new Intel Atom D510 processor through its paces, to see how it stacks up against previous generation Atom CPUs. Using a whitebox system from Intel, they ran their usual set of benchmark tests on the system. In summary the D510-equipped whitebox finished neck and neck with the dual-core powered Acer R3610-U9012. So while there are differences between the two, if you already have a nettop running the dual-core Intel Atom 330 processor you won't have to upgrade 'just because' there's a new CPU in the wings."

cancel ×

86 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

So in other words (2, Funny)

mirix (1649853) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518432)

A chip released in 2009 is still on par with a PIII from close to a decade ago?

Although lower power is always nice.

Re:So in other words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30518470)

and way less power is kinda good, too.

Re:So in other words (5, Informative)

maxume (22995) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518500)

Lower power, lower cost, bigger L2.

Re:So in other words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30518622)

And lower temperature, which also means less noise.

Re:So in other words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30524942)

> And lower temperature, which also means less noise.

Yeah especially when you accidentally touch it.

It's an admission (4, Insightful)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518628)

The very existence of netbooks and nettops are an admission by the entire industry that the majority of tasks performed by computers these days are served well enough by a "Pentium III", perhaps with the addition of a better GPU than existed back then.

It's confirmation of the old suspicion that computers were becoming TOO powerful for most current uses, that hardware has been advancing quicker than the typical needs of the software. While everyone may benefit from a quad-core 3GHz CPU once in a while, it's not many of us even here that require it every hour of the day (you guys playing Forged Alliance in Mom's converted basement are excepted). It's that "subjective experience" bit all over again: having to wait longer than an instant for something to complete, even just for a few minutes total a day, is the subjective experience that sticks with us, while we conveniently forget the good times that went on the rest of those 24 hours. It's like what they say about it being the little (negative) things that wind up killing marriages.

Re:It's an admission (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30518696)

whatever, dude. just give me tomorrow's technology yesterday and get 'r done.

Re:It's an admission (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518706)

Get what done?

Re:It's an admission (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30521824)

'r

I assume it is a wildcard of some sort.

Re:It's an admission (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30522508)

I think the whole comment was a wildcard.

Re:It's an admission (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30522340)

this: http://www.r-project.org/

Re:It's an admission (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30522480)

Okay... and how many minutes total out of every 24 hours will that be using close to 100% of each core? Is the process so utterly time-critical that you can't wait a few more seconds or minutes for it to complete on a less expensive, less energy-sucking, less heat-spewing CPU? C'mon, admit it... the answer's no, isn't it?

Re:It's an admission (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30525024)

The newer Intel Core 2 based PCs I got not long ago are less energy sucking and less heat spewing than my Athlon XP based computers.

Re:It's an admission (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30525526)

So? An Athlon XP is also virtually unusable for many tasks now; it's not a reasonable comparison. A more reasonable one would be a comparison to one of the Atom-, ARM-, or Ion-based systems, which are much more capable than the fastest of the old Athlon XP series AND draw less power and produce less heat than both the Athlon XP and Core 2 Duo.

Re:It's an admission (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30550382)

What? Athlon XPs (at least the higher end ones) are definitely faster than Atoms. They are no more unusable than Atom based computers.

Re:It's an admission (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30551838)

I wouldn't expect that to be the case. Citations? I need to see proof. :-)

Re:It's an admission (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30518814)

That is why Flash was developed. It requires lots of resources even for simple tasks. It brings back the computing experience of the late 90s.

Re:It's an admission (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30519586)

To keep ahead of the performance curve, Adobe will re-implement Flash in Java so users won't experience any upsetting increases in performance when they upgrade their processors in the next few years.

Re:It's an admission (1)

samwichse (1056268) | more than 4 years ago | (#30525972)

I think I just threw up a little bit in the back of my mouth.

Re:It's an admission (1)

simplerThanPossible (1056682) | more than 4 years ago | (#30532200)

It's part of a conspiracy of a world-wide cartel of efficiency-oriented programmer that control computing, to ensure their skills remain in demand. Whenever computers start getting too fast, they contrive another layer. The iPhone is another of their strategies.

Re:It's an admission (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30519102)

"It's confirmation of the old suspicion that computers were becoming TOO powerful for most current uses"

I think the issue is backwards, it's that computers are NOT powerful enough to enable the NEXT killer application, it's been a while since the there has been a killer app (for the pc) that required everyone to have a decent CPU.

Re:It's an admission (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30519188)

And why would you actually want such a thing to take place, unless:

(a) you're a hopeless ADD case addicted to the next shiny thing*, or
(b) you're in the business of selling overpriced computer hardware?

* In which case, build yer own damned next shiny thing and pestering the rest of us.

Re:It's an admission (1)

darthdavid (835069) | more than 4 years ago | (#30521766)

Why would you want an app that needs better hardware? You should be content with punchcards. Scratch that, you should be happy with an abacus, in my day we had to count out binary on our fingers (we only had two of 'em 'cause the rest fell off from frostbite while we were walking to school (uphill both ways) through 11 feet of snow in negative 50 degree weather) and we were happy to have that. My grandpappy didn't even know how to count 'cause no one had invented numbers yet! Now GET OFFA MY LAWN!

Re:It's an admission (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30522128)

You can actually count a lot further on your fingers in binary than in decimal... all the way up to 1023 to be precise :) Assuming you've lost no fingers to frostbite...

Re:It's an admission (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30522560)

What lawn? All I see is a meadow of weeds... *swish* *swish*
*thump* Damn, what's a lawnmower doin' in here? Looks like it hasn't been started since the Eighties... which might explain the meadow?

Re:It's an admission (1)

sowth (748135) | more than 4 years ago | (#30527924)

Why should we need a multi-GHz computer to do word processing and look up information? Those tasks should be instantaneous on a 100MHz computer!

Re:No kidding (1)

grapeape (137008) | more than 4 years ago | (#30519974)

Frankly to the detriment of my own business I have done more repair and upgrade than new builds. I'm a bit too honest for my own good I guess, but I just don't see the point in telling a customer that the upgrade they think they need could be achieved through more ram or a better video card. There are some exceptions of course but mostly heavy gamers or those into audio/video stuff. I used to upgrade every 6-8 months, but my main desktop I have had for going on 3 years. In fact the only machines I have had for personal use since that upgrade have been more toys to play with like the dual atom mini desktop im typing on now, its plenty sufficient for email and web use and the whole thing cost less than $300.

Re:No kidding (1)

pantherace (165052) | more than 4 years ago | (#30520946)

Indeed, that's the case now for the most part. The last two upgrades I've had (laptop & desktop) have been because the prior one broke. While it's nicer to be able to render something in 15 seconds vs 60, it's still long enough that there's a definite gap. (Also, 15 seconds is in some ways more annoying, because at a minute, you are free to do something else, 15 seconds isn't enough time to finish much of anything.)

Re:It's an admission (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 4 years ago | (#30520812)

The very existence of netbooks and nettops are an admission by the entire industry that the majority of tasks performed by computers these days are served well enough by a "Pentium III", perhaps with the addition of a better GPU than existed back then.

No matter how far back you go, portable computers ALWAYS had CPUs slower than their desktop counterparts for the sake of lower heat, and longer battery life.

When the majority of DESKTOP PCs use such slow CPUs, THEN you might have a point. Right now, you're just trying to force the facts to fit your worldview.

Re:It's an admission (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30522640)

Wrong! I live deep in the recesses of a cave, so I don't have a worldview!

Re:It's an admission (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 4 years ago | (#30532958)

touché

You're right, some data to back it up (1)

anti-NAT (709310) | more than 4 years ago | (#30521046)

$ uptime
  17:04:37 up 3 days, 7:03, 0 users, load average: 0.04, 0.06, 0.01
$ cpufreq-info | grep "cpufreq stats"
    cpufreq stats: 2.40 GHz:1.97%, 2.13 GHz:0.03%, 1.87 GHz:0.04%, 1.60 GHz:97.97% (302491)
    cpufreq stats: 2.40 GHz:2.11%, 2.13 GHz:0.02%, 1.87 GHz:0.03%, 1.60 GHz:97.84% (254077)
    cpufreq stats: 2.40 GHz:2.18%, 2.13 GHz:0.02%, 1.87 GHz:0.02%, 1.60 GHz:97.78% (203704)
    cpufreq stats: 2.40 GHz:1.15%, 2.13 GHz:0.01%, 1.87 GHz:0.01%, 1.60 GHz:98.83% (118501)
$

(load the 'cpufreq_stats' module to have the cpufreq-info utility display these stats)

Some other data [note: mpstat is much better] (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30521992)

Well, I guess different people do have different needs...

~> uptime
  11:00am up 524 days 2:23, 0 users, load average: 1.08, 1.02, 1.01

~> mpstat -P ALL
(REDACTED)

11:03:16 AM CPU %user %nice %sys %iowait %irq %soft %steal %idle intr/s
11:03:16 AM all 1.00 51.04 0.57 0.18 0.02 0.02 0.00 47.18 392.80
11:03:16 AM 0 1.15 26.71 0.42 0.26 0.01 0.01 0.00 71.44 173.44
11:03:16 AM 1 1.55 54.85 0.64 0.36 0.03 0.04 0.00 42.53 141.12
11:03:16 AM 2 0.67 55.64 0.57 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.06 0.09
11:03:16 AM 3 0.63 66.97 0.63 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.00 31.66 78.16

Re:It's an admission (1)

w0mprat (1317953) | more than 4 years ago | (#30521456)

I disagree. I as an experiment reccently fired up my old Pentium III 512mb workstation which was well specc'd to run Windows XP in it's era, it was slow compared to my more reccent machines to that point I wondered how we ever put up with it, and the thing ran to 100% cpu use on the first javascript laden web page I encountered. This made me realise our perception of performance has changed, and really what we see as simple tasks, such as viewing photos from our digital camera are now much more intensive than you think, because those tasks themselves have a bigger footprint. Best example, I had a 2 megapixel camera then, I have a 12mp now. You need more CPU juice just to scroll thumbnails on these!

The very existence of netbooks and nettops are an admission by the entire industry that the majority of tasks performed by computers these days are served well enough by a "Pentium III", perhaps with the addition of a better GPU than existed back then.

Only to some extent. You wouldn't say that if you actually tried an old system on basic web surfing someone may do today. You'd see a atom really is quite quick. If you try loading slashdot or facebook in firefox would burn the CPU at 100%, infact my web browser performance was CPU-bound. Oh and forget about anything resembling smooth scrolling in web pages.

In my little experiment I found this old pentium III 1ghz to be painfully slow loading images from my mediocre 12-megapixel camera, an experience that is somewhat snappier on my atom netbook.

I used to work with digital images back, then just the same, but they were at most 2 megapixels. So yeah I'm still doing the same list of every day tasks on my quad core rig or atom netbook, but lets not leave out the fact these tasks themselves are now higher fidelity.

Or am I just crazy that I can detect the lag on a atom versus a quad core rig?

Re:It's an admission (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30522604)

You were taking my comments more literally and absolutely than they were intended; I didn't literally mean a Pentium III should be fine. I meant it relative to, say, a Core i7 or a Phenom II X4 9950. In that context, your Atom is the figurative Pentium III, good enough for 90% of what needs to get done without being SO under-performing that it actually causes a material problem. If it causes perceptual problems, well... be patient and get over it. :-)

Re:It's an admission (1)

Ozric (30691) | more than 4 years ago | (#30523768)

The very existence of netbooks and nettops are an admission by the entire industry that the majority of tasks performed by computers these days are served well enough by a "Pentium III", perhaps with the addition of a better GPU than existed back then..

I agree 100% the problem is Code Bloat and no optimization.

Re:So in other words (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518758)

That isn't exactly the surprising thing. If you look around, people are still spinning new embedded 386 cores, with all the screaming performance of 25 years ago.

What is very significant is that performance a decade old is being marketed directly to end users, in more or less overtly "computer" shaped packages. If you count embedded stuff, you can find all sorts of archaisms hanging around; but the fact that old performance is showing up in new computers, meant for individual use, is quite interesting.

How is VIA Nano in comparison? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30519800)

VIA has their Nano 3000 series.

Anyone knows how well (or bad) the VIA Nano 3000 stack against Intel Atom?

Any comparison / shootout done by any website?

Anyone?

Re:How is VIA Nano in comparison? (1)

MrMr (219533) | more than 4 years ago | (#30521788)

I guess you will have to wait until VIA pays for a review as well.

Very poor video build in to cpu and no DVI / hdmi? (0, Troll)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518486)

Very poor video build in to cpu and no DVI / hdmi?
What a joke VGA can do higher res then digital out on this cpu.

And there is no pci-e x16 bus to add a better video card.

I think that new intel laptop cpus use a faster ver of this carp video system.

Nvidia ion is faster and ion 2 is even faster and what is this half the speed of ion 1?

Re:Very poor video build in to cpu and no DVI / hd (1)

Cougar Town (1669754) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518748)

Not everything has to meet your dream requirements. It only has to have a target audience, and I see a system with high-end video having one audience and a more integrated chip (and probably less power-consuming) with lesser graphics performance combined with a cheaper motherboard, having a different audience.

From the way you talk, there's no point in selling anything but top of the line i7 or Xeon systems, because who would ever want any of those cheaper, less powerful crappy systems?

Re:Very poor video build in to cpu and no DVI / hd (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518846)

I am a little surprised at how gimped the video options are, not so much because everything needs to be a howling mad game machine; but because Intel had earlier been making noises about trying to become a player in set top boxes(with their CE3100 and CE4100, with the implication that future processors would follow).

It could be that Intel is planning on spinning a STB variant of these new Atoms, or some upcoming equivalent, with video that doesn't suck, and they prefer to keep the two separate(perhaps to preserve the margins on core2s?)

For my purposes, I find these pleasing because they will, once Intel pumps out their inevitable reference mini-ITX or smaller boards, make it really easy to produce cheap, energy efficient, and fairly powerful network and storage appliances. ARM is arguably superior for the purpose; but, as a hobbyist, I appreciate being able to buy, in quantities of one, reasonably embeddable boards that will also boot stock debian just as easily as any normal PC will.

Re:Very poor video build in to cpu and no DVI / hd (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | more than 4 years ago | (#30519262)

Unless it can run 1080p video from a software renderer, and also have an antivirus scan going in the background, it's too slow. Don't get me wrong, I love my netbook, but the slowdowns, and stuttering on even lower-rez video gets annoying (youtube/hulu/netflix). It just isn't enough. I kind of like the 10" form factor for portability, though will probably go up to a 12-13" laptop next time around for a bit faster CPU, maybe an SU7300 or something similar. In the server space, the biggest limitation is motherboards supporting 4+ sata drives with an atom. I could see an atom running software raid for a 4-6 drive nas box. I think it's still under powered for anything that will serve DLNA/uPnP video. It's underpowered (even with ION) for media center chores, where ARM tends to run better and cost less. I can get a roku HD box for less than one of these would cost with a case, psu, memory etc.

Re:Very poor video build in to cpu and no DVI / hd (1)

Score Whore (32328) | more than 4 years ago | (#30520516)

In the server space, the biggest limitation is motherboards supporting 4+ sata drives with an atom. I could see an atom running software raid for a 4-6 drive nas box. I think it's still under powered for anything that will serve DLNA/uPnP video. It's underpowered (even with ION) for media center chores, where ARM tends to run better and cost less. I can get a roku HD box for less than one of these would cost with a case, psu, memory etc.

1) Supermicro has two Atom based "server" motherboards. They have 1 PCI, 1 8xPCI-E, and 1 4xPCI-E in a 8xPCI-E form. Dual gigabit nics.
2) I've got a Zotac ION-F-E + Supermicro AOC-USAS-L8I with 8 Seagate Momentus laptop drives. The L8I is not being used as a raid controller. It's just an 8 drive jbod. Running OpenSolaris + ZFS, it easily provides 95 MB/s streaming throughput. From an IOPS perspective, 4k random synch writes it does 600. And draws an entire 60 watts when under load. If you didn't want to go with an ION/SAS solution, you can but the Intel Atom board for around $75 and buy the SATA controller of your choice.
3) The Zotac ION C right next to it is fanless. With VDPAU it plays 1080p video with zero stuttering and a CPU utilization of 10%.

An Atom isn't any kind of big time number cruncher. But it's more than capable of handling NAS duties on a smallish SOHO network (5-10 simultaneous users easily.) If you pair it with Nvidia's ION chipset, it'll serve HTPC duties just fine as well.

Re:Very poor video build in to cpu and no DVI / hd (2, Insightful)

MemoryDragon (544441) | more than 4 years ago | (#30521734)

Actually the entire design is marketing enforced, everything smells of we try to kill ION in its infancy. Atom itself had the potential to impact the desktop sales of NVidias more powerful processors by simply attaching a decent graphics card on their utter garbage the Atom in fact really is. (Atom is a wannabe ARM which needs ten times the power of a similar specced ARM)
Intel tried to kill ION over illegal pricing structures the last months and now they are doing it the legal way by simply cutting off the cords ION was attached to.
If one platform screams for decent graphics coprocessors it definitely is the netbooks, and Intel tries to hamper that as much as possible by shutting out the only vendor who delivers such a combination! (for now, NVidia already is working with Via to bring the ION to the via processors and its ARM combo already is underway and used by some)

Re:Very poor video build in to cpu and no DVI / hd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30641182)

"Intel tried to kill ION over illegal pricing structures the last months and now they are doing it the legal way"

Those BASTARDS! Attempting to kill their competitor's product legally? Will they stop at nothing?

Intel has a new Atom-specific chipset and there are some interesting motherboards out now, esp. Supermicro's X7SPA-7HF with the latest Atom D510 CPU, Intel ICH-9R chipset with 6 on-board SATA ports, dual DDR2 SoDIMMs (supporting 4 Gigs of RAM), dual Intel Gigabit Ethernet ports and a PCI Express x4 (in a PCI Express x16 slot):

http://supermicro.com/products/motherboard/ATOM/ICH9/X7SPA.cfm?typ=H&IPMI=Y

Re:Very poor video build in to cpu and no DVI / hd (2, Insightful)

WarlockD (623872) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518828)

No joke. I can live without a full PCI-e bus IF you give me some decent performance I would let it ride. God don't they own Ati?

But this thing? Its DESIGNED to take the Ion and anyone else who wants to make a chipset for it out of the game. Look at the whitepapers here: http://www.intel.com/products/processor/atom/techdocs.htm [intel.com]

There will NEVER be a system, using this chip, with a DVI out neither. Why? The CPU outputs DIRECTLY to VGA. It has a LDVS interface, but it doesn't look like you can split it off for a second display. Maybe as a motherboard but never for the laptop. With the exception of directly connecting it to memory, the only outside interface to the chipset is its "direct media interface", but it looks like the same signaling for PCI-E. One channel.

Thats it. You got a PC with a signle PCI-E slot, were all your USB/Wireless/Ethernet and Hard drive pipe though. They did this to lock down the chip.

All that being said, if they make this chip cheap enough then everything I said is moot. IF the D510 sells for under 299 and the D400's make a 199 laptop, its worth it for the price. But if AMD can get on the ball with their new chip and the ion chipset, they might win this war.

Wait, what? (3, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 4 years ago | (#30520010)

You want to add a PCIe video card to an atom system? WTF? Do you also want to fit a racing spoiler on your Smart Car? This is a low power chip. It is designed for efficient systems that doesn't do a whole lot, like netbooks. It is not designed for gaming. If you want a system with external graphics Intel makes a chip for that too. You hay have heard of a little thing called the Core 2, which is available in desktop and mobile versions, is fast as hell, and uses external graphics.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

MemoryDragon (544441) | more than 4 years ago | (#30521708)

Actually with the old netbooks it was like that. Plain ATOM reference design, cheap junk doing the bare needs. Add to that an ION, the power consumption went down, you could full HD video without straining the processor and it was possible to play games (not the latest ones, but it was possible)

The new design is like that, you have to buy a SOC and then there is no way to add a better graphics card!

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30522688)

No. No. No. Why have you jumped from non-integrated graphics to real-time raytracing? Just on day-to-day desktop things, advanced GPUs can do things so much better (faster, on less power; more efficiently) than an x86 CPU does.

Real world proof of this is the low-powered mobile graphics chipsets li the Nvidia 9400M (aka ION). They bring a huge amount to the table, including 3d that works but most importantly: hardware accellerated video decoding (VDAPU et al or DXVA). You can use 20% of your GPU time on something that would have cost 130% CPU time.

In terms of power usage: Low CPU + Medium GPU High CPU.. And you get a better user experience to boot.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

WarlockD (623872) | more than 4 years ago | (#30527744)

You DO know the PCIe is a bus right? You don't JUST plug a video card into it, this is not AGP world now.

Most modern motherboards use the PCIe bus for everything. Built in network cards, the keyboard controller, USB ports all run on that bus on the board. Just because there are no slots on the board dosn't mean it doesn't use it all internal.

My complaint was that I thought it only had a single 2.5Gbps bus channel for everything outside of the processor. It was too limiting as if you wanted an MPEG4 decoder chip, you would use a good porton of the bandwith trasfing to the cpu's video controler. Hell, lets not even think about gaming. You can't get most of the figures out of Areo without at least DX10 compatibility. The new Microsoft 2010 supposed to render windows in DirectX supposedly. I was wrong however. A closer look at the white paper showed:

"Support 4 lanes in each direction, 2.5 Gbps per lane per direction, poin-to-point DMI interface to Intel NM10 Express chipset."

Its just when you look at the pins, electrically, it looks like a PCIe interface so I was confused. 6Gbps is enough for anything on that laptop. I just worry that intel has the DMI bus locked so no one can make their own chip set.

Euh, Atom 330? (1)

Corporate Troll (537873) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518590)

It sucks.... Major balls... I have an Point Of View Atom 330 motherboard and it's barely usable for common task like surfing, email and word processing. I only tried it using Ubuntu, but I have an ION version so it should compensate for video display. Frankly.... No... It doesn't. Flash video is barely usable, Flash games like Farmville on Facebook are unusable.

I know, I know... the focus is low power, but my Asus EEE 701 4G does better with it's Celeron 900MHz. So saying that it's barely better than an Atom 330 is saying that a Lada is barely better than a Trabant.

I now installed WinXP SP3 on it.... Perhaps it's only a driver issue... Haven't had the time to play around with it.... Perhaps it will be better, perhaps not.

A AMD XP 2400+ with a bit of ram fares much better than any of these motherboards...Yes, except for power management.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518624)

Are you running Flash 10.1? It's supposed to make a HUGE difference on underpowered platforms.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

anss123 (985305) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518634)

Flash games like Farmville on Facebook

Gave my sister an 2.4 Ghz E6600 to tackle that game but it still runs like a dog.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

TrancePhreak (576593) | more than 4 years ago | (#30519272)

My E6600 runs it just fine. My guess is running it alongside something else that is resource heavy. Although I do run it in the lower quality setting.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30518682)

WTF!? I have an EEE 1000h, which means Atom N270. With that I surf, email and program a lot. I run Debian and Windows 7. And I have no reason to complain about performance.

I imagine everything could be slightly faster, but I am not seeing how that improves my experience. I also have a Core 2 Duo desktop. It sure does HD videos and games a lot better. But I don't feel any improvement with regards to surfing, emailing and programming.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (4, Informative)

PhrstBrn (751463) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518692)

As the previous posted said, use Flash 10.1. The hardware acceleration makes a huge difference. Before using the "beta" version Flash was practically unusable.

I have a Atom 330 with nVidia ION as well, and it can decode 720p H.264 video just fine (about 10-20% CPU usage in media player classic, or 30-40% with Flash). Haven't tried 1080p, but I'd suspect it works okay too. I'm using Win7, but I'd suspect that shouldn't make a difference.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

straponego (521991) | more than 4 years ago | (#30519766)

Linux Flash 10.1 doesn't do hardware decoding, because Adobe is in their five-year LA LA LA LA stage when told that a commonly-used technology (64 bit, VDPAU) should be supported.

That said, I got a Revo 3610 (Atom 330, tiny, ION chipset, wireless N, gige) and so far I'm quite happy with it. It's very quiet-- quieter than anything else in my house, anyway... And hardware support is good under Linux. Video playback with VLC/mplayer is fine. Youtube fullscreen is choppy: again, fuadobe. Come on, HTML5!

I had problems finding it in the US, though. Every vendor was out, and the comments from those who did find one indicated that the VESA mounting bracket for the rear of a monitor was not included; instead Americans get shafted with a pair tiny, horrible speakers.

If anybody's looking, I was able to find a vendor in Canada that did have it in stock, and at least mine came with the mounting bracket (which is kind of a PITA to use, but does work). NCIXUS... no financial relation, just a geek who got his new toy in time for the holidays...

So in conclusion: yeah, Flash sucks, but Flash will always suck, especially on Linux. The Atom 330 with ION makes a pretty good media/web terminal, and eats about 19W in use. Now I can move its noisy, huge predecessor into the closet as a MythTV/fileserver/etc/etc box.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

PhrstBrn (751463) | more than 4 years ago | (#30520056)

I don't know how true or accurate this statement is, but Adobe claims no hardware acceleration on Linux is due to lack of standard API.

In Flash Player 10.1, H.264 hardware acceleration is not supported under either Linux or Mac OS X. Linux currently lacks a developed standard API that supports H.264 hardware video decoding, and Mac OS X does not expose access to the required APIs. The Flash Player team will continue to evaluate adding hardware acceleration to Linux and Mac OS X in future releases.

http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/fplayer10.1_hardware_acceleration_02.html

Either Adobe is full of it (which wouldn't surprise me in the slightest), or somebody better start cracking that egg.

I think the key to remember is not you may not be able to do it on linux (because you clearly can do hardware accelerated video decoding), but that the tools *may* not be developer friendly enough for them to attempt to support it.

I'd be interested to know from somebody who's done video and/or graphics related development on both sides to see how accurate/true this statement might be.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

GNious (953874) | more than 4 years ago | (#30525504)

I don't know how true or accurate this statement is, but Adobe claims no hardware acceleration on Linux is due to lack of standard API.

In Flash Player 10.1, H.264 hardware acceleration is not supported under either Linux or Mac OS X. Linux currently lacks a developed standard API that supports H.264 hardware video decoding, and Mac OS X does not expose access to the required APIs. The Flash Player team will continue to evaluate adding hardware acceleration to Linux and Mac OS X in future releases.

On OSX, can this not be accomplished via OpenCL? And aren't similar solutions available on Linux??

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

sowth (748135) | more than 4 years ago | (#30527734)

You might ask the mplayer guys. They seem to do hardware acceleration on Linux just fine. My guess is the single guy who ports to Linux is just incompetent. He can't even figure out ALSA [slashdot.org] , and the fact that various helper libraries exist confuses him.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30521980)

I ordered my 3610 from Taiwan on Ebay, less expensive, 320gb hdd vs the 160 standard, Free DOS vs XP.

I'm with you on the Atom 330 + ION, Flash is not the proper use case for this box. HTPC is, and if you're using Flash for a HTPC, you aren't doing it right. XBMC rocks on this. Mine is solely an MPD, XBMC box, and I love it.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

MemoryDragon (544441) | more than 4 years ago | (#30521700)

The main issue here is the new Atom is crippled, it is deliberately designed to keep the ION chipset at bay by doing a SOC design. There is no speed difference to its predecessors.
So what we will see from that will be just another flood of new netbooks doing the old things, and less ION based ones (as if there were that many to begin with, Intel was rather successful to keep them away by outpricing NVidia by illegal means - they sold the GMA + Atom combination cheaper than Atom alone so NVidia was on a lost course here)

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30550428)

I would think that the primary motive for the SOC design is to reduce power consumption and manufacturing costs, with the locking out the ION chipset being a happy side-effect for Intel.

The reason it hasn't gone any faster, is most likely due to Intel not wanting it to cannibalise too much of the market of their more expensive chips.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30518752)

I have a home made box with intel's integrated atom 330 mini itx mobo. Running Xubuntu. Runs well for most things.

Video plays well.

Firefox sometimes scrolls slowly on big pages. This got a lot better with the last *buntu release though.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

RuBLed (995686) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518906)

Maybe you had a defective one. I bought one a month ago to replace an aging home desktop and installed Linux Mint on it. Works like charm for the family's surfing needs, Facebook works, flash games works, youtube works, everything aside from 3D games.

What I noticed at first though that it would often lock up after 15 minutes or so and the screen would go corrupt. It was the know fan/heat issues on this one so I got myself a smaller casing (one made for Atom), bought a better GPU fan, replaced the thermal paste on both CPU and GPU heatsinks, cannibalized a heatsink from an old video card and glued it a little over the other exposed motherboard chip and it had worked like charm ever since.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518992)

Meh, I run 1080p video just fine on my 330/Ion/Linux machine. It's just flash that sucks balls, and seems persistent in doing so. If flash was open source someone would have patched in VDPAU support long ago, for now we're left at the mercy of Adobe *shudder*. From what I've understood their hardware acceleration support is DXVA = Windows only even in the latest beta, they need to be take out back and shot 100 times as bad as IE6.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

Mad Merlin (837387) | more than 4 years ago | (#30519050)

...Flash games like Farmville on Facebook are unusable.

So play Game! [wittyrpg.com] instead, no Flash!

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

LordKronos (470910) | more than 4 years ago | (#30519896)

An Ion based system can run a mythtv frontend with 1080p video and provide 1080i deinterlacing that is superior in quality to the software deinterlacing you can get off of a Core 2 Duo, and the Ion system does it with CPU >90% idle and about a 25 watt power draw for the whole system.

Re:Euh, Atom 330? (1)

RMS Eats Toejam (1693864) | more than 4 years ago | (#30520100)

You were using Linux and didn't realize it would be slow? Is your name "McFly" by any chance?

What's the point of the table? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30518674)

I don't seem to understand what's the point of a table full of "N/A". If it doesn't apply then why would you put that in a table as a comparison?

Re:What's the point of the table? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30518700)

it's a setting in their test software, that they prolly use on other things. That's my first guess, but yes, it does look stupid like that.

power savings (1)

TheSHAD0W (258774) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518926)

Although performance is no better, the new chip sips power. That will lead to longer life or cheaper batteries. Win.

Re:power savings (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30520858)

The review had it at ~5% longer battery life. That's hardly a win.

Re:power savings (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30550700)

I didn't see battery life tests in the linked article, which isn't surprising since it was a nettop review. So where did you get the battery life figure from? The new netbook chip is supposed to provide a 20% power saving over the previous CPU and chipset. Perhaps not a compelling upgrade, but it'd be nice to have.

Who cares about benchmarks? (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30518998)

I care a bit. A little bit.

What I care more about, though, is if it can even come close to ARM CPUs in power per watt ratio. (Atom fanboys: First add the giant north bridge monster to your calculations before you answer. ^^)

WHO CARES ABOUT ARM - NOT X86 ISA !! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30519168)

If it ain't x86 it's WRONG !! ARM suxors !!

Atom 330 is an EXCELLENT FILE SERVER PROCESSOR !!

Re:Who cares about benchmarks? (2, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 4 years ago | (#30520044)

Well wonderful then, I'll just get an ARM netbook and run all my apps on it! What's that? My apps don't run on ARM? Well there you go then.

ARM fanboy: The reason people like the atom is because it runs the massive amount of x86 OSes and apps out there. You can crow on about how much better your CPU is as much as you like, it doesn't make any difference when you are sitting there not running anything because it doesn't have a good base of software. There is some extreme usefulness is having binary compatibility between your desktop, laptop, and netbook.

Re:Who cares about benchmarks? (3, Insightful)

jabjoe (1042100) | more than 4 years ago | (#30521380)

Fine, you stick with x86. But I'm looking forwards to the ARM netbooks, but I might wait for the A9 ones. I don't need massive about amount of CPU, just enough to play HD video comfortably. I don't need x86. ARM Linux runs what I'm running now, I can see it in the repositories. If there is something I really want that doesn't run on ARM, I'll look at porting it as a project. Which is part of the joy of open source and why so much is already cross platform. On both the netbook and desktop, you install software from the repository for, so binary compatibility doesn't matter.

Re:Who cares about benchmarks? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30521454)

This shit is modded up? It should be marked -1 Troll as that's what it is.

Unlike you, some of us left the MS treadmill long ago so our apps run just fine on ARM. Many of the apps I use on my desktop Linux machine even work on Debian I have running in a bootstrap on my G1 cellphone. Just because you are locked in through your combination of fear/ignorance/laziness doesn't mean everyone else is too.

Re:Who cares about benchmarks? (1)

GNious (953874) | more than 4 years ago | (#30527120)

No mod-points but: Parent Is Right!

Re:Who cares about benchmarks? (1)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 4 years ago | (#30527010)

Well... My apps run on ARM. They run on x86, SPARC, MIPS and would run just the same on zSeries mainframes.

If your apps don't run on the hardware you want, then, perhaps, they are not really your apps - they belong to their makers and you are just the person using them.

Re:Who cares about benchmarks? (2, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#30522154)

(Atom fanboys: First add the giant north bridge monster to your calculations before you answer. ^^)

Perhaps the ARM fanboy should RTFA, since there is no more giant north bridge?

Nettop itx ATOM board done right. (1)

csoh (45909) | more than 4 years ago | (#30521262)

Look at the picture of this board. Unlike typical atom330+945gc nettop board it has NO FAN. And if we recall the fact that 945gc chipset consumes 25w of power, way more than 8w cpu itself, I would rather call this board "Nettop ATOM board done right, powerwise". So if you already have netbook which uses 945gse mobile chipset(which is already power efficient), this would mean nothing more than minor facelift. But if you're going to buy atom330+945gc itx nettop board, this is much improved product to consider regarding power. And minor upgrade from gma950 to gma3150(slightly improved g31), would be better than nothing.

More reviews at techreport.com and anandtech.com (2)

IYagami (136831) | more than 4 years ago | (#30521404)

The main benefit of the new Atom platform is its improved efficiency.

More info at:

Intel's next-gen Atom arrives in Asus' Eee PC 1005PE netbook
http://techreport.com/articles.x/18167 [techreport.com]
"Pine Trail's pseudo-system-on-chip architecture is quite a departure from the first Atom platform and an impressive achievement for Intel. Not only has the company managed to drop the number of chips and dramatically reduce the platform's footprint, but it has also lowered power consumption by a healthy margin. Those improvements should make it easier for manufacturers to churn out slimmer and lighter netbooks with better battery life than ever before."

Intel Atom D510: Pine Trail Boosts Performance, Cuts Power
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3692 [anandtech.com]
"First, new vs. old Atom. With a real world performance improvement approaching 10% on the desktop, I'm happy with the performance of Pine Trail. Short of Intel introducing a brand new architecture, Atom isn't going to get much better, so the fact that we're getting anything is worth being happy about.
The impact of the on-die memory controller is noticeable on overall system performance. As I said earlier, my Pine Trail testbed was snappier and more responsive than my older Atom machines. It's by no means fast, but it's noticeably faster than before.
Power consumption is also much improved thanks to Intel ditching the archaic 945 chipset. Although the impact on battery life in netbooks is going to be more exciting than drawing less power at the wall. Pine Trail is worth waiting for."

ASUS Eee PC 1005PE: Pineview Arrives
http://anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.aspx?i=3693 [anandtech.com]
"The latest release of Atom brings quite a few changes, but the net result isn't quite as impressive as we were hoping. We have an integrated memory controller in the CPU along with a GPU on package. Those are cost saving measures that also provide some benefits in terms of power requirements. What they apparently don't provide is a significant improvement in performance. Anand saw around a 10% improvement in performance relative to Diamondville on the desktop, but the real problem is what we didn't get.
Specifically, Pineview needed a lot more than GMA 3150 to make it attractive. Given a choice between N280 ION and N450 Pineview, ION will offer a better overall experience for the vast majority of users. If you want to do a silent HTPC, Pineview is going to need some form of external graphics, making the GMA 3150 a waste of space. We would have been much happier if Intel had included GMA 4500 instead, and even then it would be underpowered compared to ION."

Re:More reviews at techreport.com and anandtech.co (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30626492)

Intel Atom D510: Pine Trail Boosts Performance, Cuts Power Looking for the price of this board on the internet I found it at http://www.mini-box.com/D510MO-mini-ITX-Intel [mini-box.com] , and the price is not bad :). With a proper miniITX enclosure and Broadcom Cristal HD miniPCI card it would be a nice fanless and silent HTPC for my living room.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>