Comments on: Intel Atom Processor Benchmarked http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html Notebooks, Tablets, UMPCs, Laptop-Like Devices - News, Reviews, Deals Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:36:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.2 Comment on Intel Atom Processor Benchmarked by: Tiago http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-421092 Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:55:39 +0000 http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-421092 I forgot to say a couple of this in the previous post. I use the 3D environment of Compiz-Fusion but I enabled the cube deformation to a sphere and added a 7 Megapixel animated skydome beyond it (this is what "eats" more hardware power) and I can use it with only 800MHz (50%). Besides, if I use the CPU Ondemand function the CPU is always at 800MHz in idle but it stays that way when using the 3D. Thing that doesn't occur with my two laptops (an Intel Pentium M 1.6GHz and a AMD Turion 2.0GHz). In Ondemand they push to 80% or even to 100% just by rotating the sphere. And they have better graphics cards and more RAM. I know we need benchmarks to "try" to see what a piece of hardware can do and Super PI is one nice for CPUs but it tests only the arithmetic function of it. We are forgetting that the Intel Atom has SSSE3 that Celeron M does not which can enable better performance in graphics and HT that enables better multi-tasking operations. Also the Atom is build in 45nm instead of the Celeron's 65nm and has a 533MHz FSB instead of a 400MHz. All this together with the lower TDP (2.5 Watt instead of 7 Watt) makes the Atom better and that's why Intel has created it. This is a test made in real life and they often beat the benchmarks. I believe this was another one more to count. I forgot to say a couple of this in the previous post.
I use the 3D environment of Compiz-Fusion but I enabled the cube deformation to a sphere and added a 7 Megapixel animated skydome beyond it (this is what “eats” more hardware power) and I can use it with only 800MHz (50%). Besides, if I use the CPU Ondemand function the CPU is always at 800MHz in idle but it stays that way when using the 3D. Thing that doesn’t occur with my two laptops (an Intel Pentium M 1.6GHz and a AMD Turion 2.0GHz). In Ondemand they push to 80% or even to 100% just by rotating the sphere. And they have better graphics cards and more RAM.
I know we need benchmarks to “try” to see what a piece of hardware can do and Super PI is one nice for CPUs but it tests only the arithmetic function of it.
We are forgetting that the Intel Atom has SSSE3 that Celeron M does not which can enable better performance in graphics and HT that enables better multi-tasking operations. Also the Atom is build in 45nm instead of the Celeron’s 65nm and has a 533MHz FSB instead of a 400MHz.
All this together with the lower TDP (2.5 Watt instead of 7 Watt) makes the Atom better and that’s why Intel has created it.
This is a test made in real life and they often beat the benchmarks. I believe this was another one more to count.

]]> Comment on Intel Atom Processor Benchmarked by: Tiago http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-420566 Sun, 01 Mar 2009 00:51:49 +0000 http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-420566 I too have an Acer Aspire One with an Intel Atom N270 1.6GHz with only 512 MB of RAM (I will expand it later) and the graphics card is an Intel 845GMA with only 8MB of RAM. It's running Ubuntu Linux with Compiz-Fusion at full speed with no need to decrease the graphics quality. This N270 CPU was made for Netbooks only and the major thing its the 2.5 Watt TDP while the ULV Intel Celeron 900 MHz has a 7 Watt TDP. Besides (and that was announced here), the Atom has Hyper Threading with allows better performance in any OS. We don't use computers to search for the infinite number of PI (at least I don't). The ULV Celeron 900 was beaten. If you want performance get an I7. I too have an Acer Aspire One with an Intel Atom N270 1.6GHz with only 512 MB of RAM (I will expand it later) and the graphics card is an Intel 845GMA with only 8MB of RAM.
It’s running Ubuntu Linux with Compiz-Fusion at full speed with no need to decrease the graphics quality.
This N270 CPU was made for Netbooks only and the major thing its the 2.5 Watt TDP while the ULV Intel Celeron 900 MHz has a 7 Watt TDP.
Besides (and that was announced here), the Atom has Hyper Threading with allows better performance in any OS. We don’t use computers to search for the infinite number of PI (at least I don’t).
The ULV Celeron 900 was beaten. If you want performance get an I7.

]]> Comment on Intel Atom Processor Benchmarked by: Filipe http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-324817 Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:32:12 +0000 http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-324817 I have one Acer just like yours, can you tell me how you managed to install OSX 10.5.4 Leopard on it? Thanks I have one Acer just like yours, can you tell me how you managed to install OSX 10.5.4 Leopard on it?
Thanks

]]> Comment on Intel Atom Processor Benchmarked by: Alex Suzer http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-310675 Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:49:02 +0000 http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-310675 Well, I have Acer Aspire One with Intel® Atom(TM) CPU N270 1.6Ghz 1.5GB Ram and it is running Mac OSX 10.5.4 Leopard with full speed. I compared it with an imac yes:) This Aspire One opens itunes in like 5 seconds and imac opens it in like 1.5 or 2 sec and the same thing with other softwares. So, I dont know about the benchmarks and stuff but this is what I tested. I am very happy with it running mac os. Well, I have Acer Aspire One with
Intel® Atom(TM) CPU N270 1.6Ghz 1.5GB Ram
and it is running Mac OSX 10.5.4 Leopard with full speed.
I compared it with an imac yes:) This Aspire One opens itunes in like 5 seconds and imac opens it in like 1.5 or 2 sec and the same thing with other softwares.

So, I dont know about the benchmarks and stuff but this is what I tested. I am very happy with it running mac os.

]]> Comment on Intel Atom Processor Benchmarked by: Sergey http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-279001 Thu, 25 Sep 2008 09:23:31 +0000 http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-279001 Does anybody tested Atom-based computers in clusters? I'd like to try this kind of hardware but I'm still not sure has this processor enough performance to produce some map-reduce tasks or not? For example, how slow the Atom 1.6 is in comparison to Celeron Duo 1.6? The only useful thing I found at the moment is the extremely low power consumption. Does anybody tested Atom-based computers in clusters? I’d like to try this kind of hardware but I’m still not sure has this processor enough performance to produce some map-reduce tasks or not? For example, how slow the Atom 1.6 is in comparison to Celeron Duo 1.6?
The only useful thing I found at the moment is the extremely low power consumption.

]]> Comment on Intel Atom Processor Benchmarked by: Manuel http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-218305 Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:13:16 +0000 http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-218305 Celeron M 530 1.6GHz, SuperPi 1M->47s... I prefer a CeleronM... Celeron M 530 1.6GHz, SuperPi 1M->47s…

I prefer a CeleronM…

]]> Comment on Intel Atom Processor Benchmarked by: Jean-Baptiste http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-129656 Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:46:23 +0000 http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html#comment-129656 Intel confirmed that Silverthorne/Atom is half the performance of the Celeron. Check the video interview on our site: http://www.uberpulse.com/us/2008/03/chip_shot_intel_atom_is_half_the_performance_of_celeron_video.php Intel confirmed that Silverthorne/Atom is half the performance of the Celeron. Check the video interview on our site:
http://www.uberpulse.com/us/2008/03/chip_shot_intel_atom_is_half_the_performance_of_celeron_video.php

]]>