| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 88948 | 2008-04-15 21:50:00 | UMPC & Small Notebook CPU comparison | Geek4414 (12000) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 659211 | 2008-04-15 21:50:00 | Anyone know of a good comparison of the actual performance of various UMPC and small notebook CPUs? Toshiba R500 Intel Core2Duo U7600 1.20GHz Sony Vaio TZ37 Intel Core2Duo U7700 1.33GHz HP Mini-notebook VIA C7®-M ULV Processor (up to 1.6 GHz) eeePC 701/900 Celeron-M 900MHz Vye S37 Intel A110 800MHz oQo Model 2 VIA 1.6 Ghz C7M ULV Fujitsu u1010 Intel Ultra Mobile platform 2007, processor A1100 @ 800MHz |
Geek4414 (12000) | ||
| 659212 | 2008-04-16 11:41:00 | Performance for what? Games? Desktop usage? I just re-formatted a friends Asus A6000u (With a 64-bit Turion 1.63Ghz CPU), this EeePC Im sitting on now running WinXP boots faster than a clean XP install on the A6000u! Is there any reason in particular why you're wanting a performance comparison? Generally speaking higher MHz = better performance... And, just for the record, the EeePC comes factory underclocked at 630Mhz, and it can still boot up in 12 seconds, shutdown in under 4! ;) |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 659213 | 2008-04-16 11:59:00 | Performance for what? Games? Desktop usage? I just re-formatted a friends Asus A6000u (With a 64-bit Turion 1.63Ghz CPU), this EeePC Im sitting on now running WinXP boots faster than a clean XP install on the A6000u! Is there any reason in particular why you're wanting a performance comparison? Generally speaking higher MHz = better performance... And, just for the record, the EeePC comes factory underclocked at 630Mhz, and it can still boot up in 12 seconds, shutdown in under 4! ;) Chill I don't think the speed of the CPU has too much to do with the loading of Windows. I have an old AMD XP 2500+ 1GB RAM that loads WinXP in about 10-12 seconds and my core 2 duo 2GHz 2GB RAM takes at about twice as long. I think it has more to do with what drivers need to be loaded like IDE/SATA controllers etc. |
CYaBro (73) | ||
| 659214 | 2008-04-16 13:20:00 | Agreed, thats the point I was trying to get at... didnt really make that too clear thou did I :-/ | Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 659215 | 2008-04-16 22:39:00 | www.notebookreview.com check out the performance and benchmarks section - doesn't read all that good for the HP. | mettaverse (12447) | ||
| 659216 | 2008-04-18 10:47:00 | Performance for what? Games? Desktop usage? I just re-formatted a friends Asus A6000u (With a 64-bit Turion 1 . 63Ghz CPU), this EeePC Im sitting on now running WinXP boots faster than a clean XP install on the A6000u! Is there any reason in particular why you're wanting a performance comparison? Generally speaking higher MHz = better performance . . . And, just for the record, the EeePC comes factory underclocked at 630Mhz, and it can still boot up in 12 seconds, shutdown in under 4! ;) I am more interested in the performace for general application use, it will mostly be general office apps and email, BUT [very] occasionally Photoshop, DreamWeaver & InDesign etc . Please don't flame me for trying to use these sort of apps on a tiny notebook . It will only be for emergency work while I am away from the office for extended period of time . Higher MHz is no longer a good gauge of the speed of any system these days, as you cannot compare apples to apples (no pun intended) . The boot time issue is more do with the SSD vs HDD difference . Apparently, the current crop of SSDs are only faster for booting and starting up apps, they are actually slower than 5400rpm HDDs when transferring or writing large files . I am well aware I can't expect miracles from any sub-notes with ULV processors . But even with the same CPUs, some of them didn't fare very well at all in reviews, the earlier version of the Sony TZ series with U7600 came up pretty bad compare to the Toshiba R500 with the same CPU . The latest version TZ (only released this week, not even on Sony's NZ site yet) on display at the Sony shop has the U7700 1 . 33GHz CPU . I wonder if there is any difference in performance to the U7600 . From just playing around with the TZ37 in the shop display, it seems snappy enough . It has a far better screen than the Toshiba R500, albeit at 11" instead of 12", the slightly smaller screen does make it fit better in bags etc . . trademe . co . nz/Computers/Laptops/Laptops/Sony/auction-145814356 . htm" target="_blank">www . trademe . co . nz Realistically, the UMPC such as U1010, oQo are far too small for practical use [for me], except for occasional web browsing on the move . Even the 11 . 1" screen on the TZ will be a bit small, but it has reasonable res at 1366 x 768 . More importantly it has claimed battery life of 11 hours . I can't imagine doing any serious work with the tiny UMPCs on business trips, but they will be cool to use when I am out and about . However, I do not have a gold mine in my back yard, I need to spend my money wisely and get one that can handle most variety of work but yet small enough and have huge battery life . None of the UMPCs seem to have 4 to 5 hours max claimed battery life, I can see real life performace to be far less . The eeePC boots fast due to the SSD drive, not the CPU speed! I can't afford the SSD option on the R500 or the TZ37 at this stage, but I will swap in a SSD when the price tumble down near the end of this year . Meanwhile, I will would prefer something like the R500 or TZ37 . With the long claimed battery life, I believe it will be practical to put it to sleep/hibernate instead of cold booting, so I should have reasonable start up time even with a 120GB 5400rpm HDD (not like the pathetic 4200rpm drives in the MBA) . Mac fanbois, please don't flame me, the Mac Book Air is beautiful but it is only for people who have more money than sense . Even Mac fanatics on the Mac forums agreed, they all believe the new Macbooks are far better choice than the MBA . It will be good to see some constructive comments based on the real life experiences of devices with these CPUs . |
Geek4414 (12000) | ||
| 659217 | 2008-04-18 10:53:00 | www.notebookreview.com check out the performance and benchmarks section - doesn't read all that good for the HP. Thanks Mettaverse, this sort of comparisons are more informative. :-) Anyway, here is a good video clip about the HP ... www.pcworld.com l And http://www.umpcportal.com has a good comparison chart between the eee PC 900 and HP 2133, but the link I saved didn't work for some reason. Will post it on here again if I find the comparison again. But like I said in my previous post, I think I have decided the tiny UMPC are not quite up to what I need. So the choices are really between the R500 and TZ37, the Lenovo X300 is far too expensive and too big/heavy with 13" screen, not to mention its earth shattering price. I don't want to have to mortgage the house to get a laptop! |
Geek4414 (12000) | ||
| 659218 | 2008-04-18 12:59:00 | It's a shame Sony isn't bringing the TZ298 to the New Zealand Market, it has a hybrid 64GB SSD and 250G HDD ! www.sonystyle.com |
Geek4414 (12000) | ||
| 659219 | 2008-04-19 11:45:00 | I'd wait to get a UMPC with the new(ish) Intel Atom processor . They have a better range of clock speeds, at lower prices, and really (stupidly, really) low energy consumption . the EEE900 jumped the gun (unwisely, I'd say), and isn't shipping with an atom . So I'd wait to get one that will, hopefully the new HP UMPC . . . And if they do, please someone get them to rework that mouse . . . what's the deal with left and right click on the left and right of the trackpad? Weird . 11" would be nice, but for my money I'd settle at 9" with the new gen ones, led by the EEE . The current 7" is just impractical, cool, but once the romance has worn off I'd bet I'd get sick of it, quickly . NZ has to be on par with ethiopia with getting this tech though . Such a shame . |
Thebananamonkey (7741) | ||
| 1 | |||||