Is an Atom better than an Athlon XP 2400+?
in [UK Linux]
|
Prev: Ogg in Firefox
Next: ACPI says temp is 256C
From: chris on 7 Sep 2009 08:31 I'm wanting to replace my ageing home desktop with a new small machine that I can leave on most of the time. It's for very basic email, web, openoffice use with the occasional light photo editing. Eventually would like to add audio streaming. Something like this could be ideal: http://www.asrock.com/nettop/spec/ION%20330.asp My question is how much difference (better or worse) would I notice when compared to my current athlon XP 2400+? In particular, is the iPlayer cpu or gpu dependent. Ideally, I want something that uses a minimum of power when idling, but with enough grunt to do the above day-to-day stuff. Or would it be more efficient to get a more powerful beast, but have it sleeping/hibernating the majority of the time? Sorry for the many variables, but I'm trying to sound out my ideas. Any comments/pointers gratefully received. Chris
From: Gordon Henderson on 7 Sep 2009 08:49 In article <h82ufn$10q$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, chris <ithinkiam(a)gmail.com> wrote: >I'm wanting to replace my ageing home desktop with a new small machine >that I can leave on most of the time. It's for very basic email, web, >openoffice use with the occasional light photo editing. Eventually would >like to add audio streaming. > >Something like this could be ideal: >http://www.asrock.com/nettop/spec/ION%20330.asp > >My question is how much difference (better or worse) would I notice when >compared to my current athlon XP 2400+? In particular, is the iPlayer >cpu or gpu dependent. I replaced my XP2400+ with an Intel Atom dual-core mobo some 6 months back. Not really noticed much difference - mplayer still works, audio is OK, X is fine too, but I don't do anything that demanding. >Ideally, I want something that uses a minimum of power when idling, but >with enough grunt to do the above day-to-day stuff. My box idles at about 42 watts including a single SATA drive. >Or would it be more efficient to get a more powerful beast, but have it >sleeping/hibernating the majority of the time? > >Sorry for the many variables, but I'm trying to sound out my ideas. Any >comments/pointers gratefully received. Depends on what you do! I found that idling the CPU doesn't make any difference at all. Get suspend working for when you're not using it... Seems to work for my Atom based netbook thing.. Gordon
From: Chris Whelan on 7 Sep 2009 10:21 On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 13:31:50 +0100, chris wrote: > I'm wanting to replace my ageing home desktop with a new small machine > that I can leave on most of the time. It's for very basic email, web, > openoffice use with the occasional light photo editing. Eventually would > like to add audio streaming. > > Something like this could be ideal: > http://www.asrock.com/nettop/spec/ION%20330.asp > > My question is how much difference (better or worse) would I notice when > compared to my current athlon XP 2400+? In particular, is the iPlayer > cpu or gpu dependent. > > Ideally, I want something that uses a minimum of power when idling, but > with enough grunt to do the above day-to-day stuff. > > Or would it be more efficient to get a more powerful beast, but have it > sleeping/hibernating the majority of the time? > > Sorry for the many variables, but I'm trying to sound out my ideas. Any > comments/pointers gratefully received. > > Chris My current everyday Internet machine is based on an Athlon XP3200. I've been playing around with mini-itx hardware that uses an Atom 330. Performance is very similar, and the Atom-based one would certainly cope with what I mostly do. The snag I have found is that the MB I am using has Intel graphics. These are not great when using a Windows OS, and are poor with Linux. The machine you have linked to would overcome that, and I'm sure would suit your stated needs. Chris -- Remove prejudice to reply.
From: chris on 7 Sep 2009 10:31 Gordon Henderson wrote: > In article <h82ufn$10q$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > chris <ithinkiam(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> I'm wanting to replace my ageing home desktop with a new small machine >> that I can leave on most of the time. It's for very basic email, web, >> openoffice use with the occasional light photo editing. Eventually would >> like to add audio streaming. >> >> Something like this could be ideal: >> http://www.asrock.com/nettop/spec/ION%20330.asp >> >> My question is how much difference (better or worse) would I notice when >> compared to my current athlon XP 2400+? In particular, is the iPlayer >> cpu or gpu dependent. > > I replaced my XP2400+ with an Intel Atom dual-core mobo some 6 months > back. Not really noticed much difference - mplayer still works, audio > is OK, X is fine too, but I don't do anything that demanding. That sounds good. What did you go for mobo-wise? I'm liking the nVidia Ion based stuff. >> Ideally, I want something that uses a minimum of power when idling, but >> with enough grunt to do the above day-to-day stuff. > > My box idles at about 42 watts including a single SATA drive. Cool. I'm hoping the nVidia Ion implementation in the Asrock box above will be even lower >-). >> Or would it be more efficient to get a more powerful beast, but have it >> sleeping/hibernating the majority of the time? >> >> Sorry for the many variables, but I'm trying to sound out my ideas. Any >> comments/pointers gratefully received. > > Depends on what you do! Clearly. I just need a low power, quiet PC which will let me do everything I currently can on my athlon XP. Perhaps with a bit of extra headroom. It needs to be cheap too. > I found that idling the CPU doesn't make any difference at all. Get > suspend working for when you're not using it... Seems to work for my > Atom based netbook thing.. Really? All the benchmarks I've seen show a significant drop in consumption when idling the PC.
From: chris on 7 Sep 2009 10:52
Chris Whelan wrote: > On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 13:31:50 +0100, chris wrote: > >> I'm wanting to replace my ageing home desktop with a new small machine >> that I can leave on most of the time. It's for very basic email, web, >> openoffice use with the occasional light photo editing. Eventually would >> like to add audio streaming. >> >> Something like this could be ideal: >> http://www.asrock.com/nettop/spec/ION%20330.asp >> >> My question is how much difference (better or worse) would I notice when >> compared to my current athlon XP 2400+? In particular, is the iPlayer >> cpu or gpu dependent. >> >> Ideally, I want something that uses a minimum of power when idling, but >> with enough grunt to do the above day-to-day stuff. >> >> Or would it be more efficient to get a more powerful beast, but have it >> sleeping/hibernating the majority of the time? >> >> Sorry for the many variables, but I'm trying to sound out my ideas. Any >> comments/pointers gratefully received. >> >> Chris > > My current everyday Internet machine is based on an Athlon XP3200. I've > been playing around with mini-itx hardware that uses an Atom 330. > Performance is very similar, and the Atom-based one would certainly cope > with what I mostly do. > > The snag I have found is that the MB I am using has Intel graphics. These > are not great when using a Windows OS, and are poor with Linux. The > machine you have linked to would overcome that, and I'm sure would suit > your stated needs. That was the plan in getting an nVidia based chipset as from all I've read the Intel implementation is v. poor. Surprisingly! Thanks very much for the feedback. |