Results of Atom cpu vs Core2Solo

I suppose that switching off one core of a C2D doesn't work in this case. So instead of simulating a core solo it still runs on two cores. Flashplayer is total crap and not suited as a benchmark. Running on two cores makes a huge difference in HD flash, though.

Edit:
7z decompression is multithreaded, so Atom's Hyperthreading helps.

 

Basically atom is crippled whether u like it or not... in some ways an atom may be better , but in most things like playing HD video atom=crap... so i do have to agree, i would nver buy an atom pc , maybe i'll bye a CULV notebook with a core 2 solo or a CULV core 2 duo...

 

That's true, the Atom is not a good choice for HD Flash. With GMA500 or ION it can play 1080p H264 fine though.

Here's Anandtech's conclusion about the Atom:

http://www.anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=3321&p=8

 

it's rather funny that you don't even get how those cpus work completely different, and thus perform well for some task, and bad for others, like it was since the first cpu's in this world.

and the atom obviously only has good performance for "netbook-tasks". vmware is a prime example of something you should never run on an atom, as the instruction set primarily used in vmware is very slow on an atom.

but continue with your hate-crap against atoms. they are still great and do their job: cheap well performers. one of those atom pc's records and livestreams each of our events and does so since months very well. and we're happy to have a machine which had cost us less than 200$ to do that. and when it one day dies, is replacable with a new machine of that cost, or even less. (and besides, it's tiny, so doesn't get into the way).

 

is all you do with your pc's just watching hd youtube? because that's the least i do with my pcs. most of my pcs have to do work, and interestingly, an atom there performs well. yes, hd decoding is not it's strength, but putting this as a priority and important thing now is just ridiculous.

 

Obviously different users have different needs - you have to find the right device for you, and not make generalizations about performance for everyone else by saying "Atom is crippled" etc.

Users who found Atom to be underperforming were exciting about CULV Core 2 Solos. Now that it has been revealed that they can't stream Flash in HD smoothly a subset of these people will now stand for nothing less than a Core 2 Duo - Core 2 Solo is obviously crap. There's always something to complain about.

This is a review of the Gateway clone of the Acer 1410 (SU3500):
http://www.silentpcreview.com/Gateway_EC1803h_notebook

Battery Life vs. 1005HA (Atom 1.66Ghz):
Web Browsing: 6:09 / 8:18
Xvid Playback: 4:24 / 6:34
x264 Playback: 3:31 / N/A

Benchmarks vs. C2D 1.4Ghz:
NOD32: 11:14 / 9:50
WinRAR: 5:38 / 5:14
iTunes: 8:46 / 7:36
TMPGEnc: 20:01 / 11:46

So yes, C2S is a lot faster than Atom. Does that mean Atom is worthless? Hardly, especially on sub-$300 machines.

 

Great benchmarks Amourek.

SU3500 vs. Atom
NOD32 11:14 16:25
WinRAR 5:38 11:12
iTunes 8:46 21:17
TMPGEnc 20:01 27:22

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article974-page7.html

 

I find it funny that your tests aren't even legit. If you want to test the CPU's power you have to isolate the CPU only. In your tests you're also incorporating the GPU performance.

I would rather trust Anandtech's tests ANY DAY over you.

Also one last thing. If you want to test a Core 2 Solo, get an actual one. Disabling one core from core 2 duo aint gonna cut it.

 

Simply too funny!!! Neither units had a GPU capable of decoding flash or HD. Everything was done on the CPU. If you knew anything about Intel GPUs you would know this...

Yes it DOES. IBM thinkpads can disable one core in the BIOS and this has been confirmed via CPU report apps and benchmarks. If you dont own a thinkpad please dont question me.

 

Obviously he did not know how to test this. Further more he didnt even give any details on what he did. Asking an inexperienced user to test does not resolve anything.

 

I tested other Youtube HD clips myself on Acer 1810T with SU3500. Check my review in my signature for details.

By the way Der_Mali is a very experienced user. Try asking any other user with SU3500.

PS. iGrim, all the benchmarks from credible sources posted in this thread have proven your benchmark wrong.

 

So please wise master enlighten me.
I don't accept flash hd benchmarks played through third party players.
An ordinary user plays it in the browser while streaming it from the web.
He doesn't pre-download it, nor does he play it through VLC or whatever.

If you use flash as a benchmark you ought to give more details how you play it, my friend.

 

Yet I came up with the same results on my 1410.

 

You're not getting the point here. He didnt post FPS....Even if the Core2Solo played the video slightly choppy im SURE it ran it at 10fps at LEAST. On the other hand the Atom ran the video at 1-2 FPS tops. This is consistent with my results of Core2Solo being FOUR time as powerful clock for clock in MANY apps. Im talking about applications that MATTER. Real-time applications that need to run in real-time like Youtube. Who cares how fast or slow winrar or winzip runs, that does not matter as it does not effect the user experience. On the other hand I posted two VERY popular apps that need real-time processing (vmware and Youtube) and as I have shown the Atom has FAILED miserably on real-time apps to the sound of being FOUR times as slow clock for clock as core2solo or even Core2 based celeron CPUs (basically the same thing). Its amazingly pathetic if you ask me and people need to know what they are buying!

 

No. You're not getting the point. Your benchmarks have been proven wrong by 4 reputable websites (Anadtech, Silent PC Review, Techreport, Notebookjournal).

About the Youtube video: You said it would play it at 800MHz.

In reality it doesn't even play at 1.4Ghz!!! So at 800 Mhz guess what... it's a slideshow. But you don't even have a SU3500 so how could you possibly know it.

But hey, I don't think you're going to admit it, because this is the third thread you've been using for the sole purpose to bash the Atom. I don't know what it is you've got against the Atom but I suggest you start using accurate information.

 

You are serious? I will post a youtube video of a single core Core2 CPU at 800zhz running the asteroid video in HD and then you can see for yourself...that is unless you have a netbook with an Atom of course he he

 

You don't even have a Core 2 Solo so you can't post it.

And we already know Atom performs bad in Flash HD. Why fill seven pages with something so obvious.

 

We will obtain a Core2Solo unit then...makes no difference if its a single core Core2duo of core2Solo as its the exact same thing...literally as the chips are identical.

 

We have several people here with SU3500 but somehow you don't believe them.

Do you really think Anadtech, Silent PC Review, Techreport and Notebookjournal got it all wrong? and you got it right?

 

and yet NONE have posted FPS! Im going out for awhile we shall resolve this later...

 

Look we all know the Atom isn't a stellar performer. And everybody understands the 1.4Ghz Core 2 Solo is a more powerful CPU.

Somehow you've got a thing against the Atom. It's just a cheap CPU that's useful for basic netbooks. It's good enough for browsing the web, watching SD video, running office and playing music. When it comes to Flash HD, it's not powerful enough.

So anyone interested in watching Youtube HD should not buy an Atom. I agree.

And anyone interested in the real performance can just check some of the real benchmarks mentioned in this thread.

 

What crap are you talking about? Flash HD runs smooth or it doesn't. Either it doesn't drop frames or it does.

 

May not be the best results and don't want to really fuel the fire. However, on my SU9300 Core 2 Duo that video in Chorme was using around 75%-85% of my cpu. Now that makes me think if I was using a Core 2 Solo(or possibly a lower speed Core 2 Duo), it wouldn't even play back smoothly.

 

Your CPU was down clocked by speedstep. Speedstep will downclock your CPU unless needed. Lock your CPU at max speed and you will see your CPU usage plummet to the ground...

 

Ill try to explain in simpler terms. Flash video performance is dynamic. You can have the video play 2 fps or 20fps depending on how powerful your CPU is.

Atom CPU runs the HD asteroid video at 1-2fps. The people who have Core2Solo units are stating that they also can NOT run the video as well. What they are not stating is at what FPS the video is running. Even if the video runs at a jumpy 10-15fps for them this clearly shows the Core2Solo chip has ~FIVE times the performance of the Atom CPU at the same clock speeds.....its very simple...

 

Seriously iGrim, you are contradicting yourself. This is what you wrote in the first post:

 

I DID run it fine and it DOES run fine on my emulated Core2Solo 800mhz CPU....Im talking about the person who claims it did not run perfectly smooth on THEIR Core2Solo unit and why it matters to post FPS....

 

No. You claim that it runs fine on your core 2 duo which you claim you have switched off one core. I own a real core 2 solo and it doesn't run smooth even at 1.4GHz. Get yourself the proper hardware to prove something then we can talk again. This is nonsense.

 

I disagree and I will prove it soon. Something must be wrong with your system...

 

I vote thread lock,this has already given iGrim too much unneeded attention

But im glad were debating playing HD videos on 1024x600 screens...

 

ditto. its clear he cant debate his point in a manner thats polite, mature or respectful to others.

 

Sorry but this is a free forum. You can take you communistic ways elsewhere as we are not interested. We are here discussing how the Atom CPU performs compared to Core2Solo. Many netbooks/sub laptops are coming with Core2Solo and it is important to reveal how these two CPUs perform in REAL world / Real-Time applications.

We are now beginning to see the shocking difference in performance. Some people dont want to hear it some do. Please move on if you are not interested in discussing this topic.

Thank you.

 

Except i'm getting the same results as him.

 

your not interested in discussing the topic,only 1 side of it,which is half a topic

 

well said lol. +rep

 

Well that means both your laptops are broken..

 

Odd according to CPU-Z my cpu is actually being overclocked. http://forum.notebookreview.com/showpost.php?p=5156226&postcount=1336

 

Here's the Asteroid HD clip played on a C2S @ 800Mhz:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_fCXDnmJRs

It's a bad reading. My SU3500 shows 1.6ghz idling too so I set my maximum processor state to 0% thinking I would get a free overclock. But when I benched it the results were a lot poorer and video playback suffered. I read that the FSB runs at half speed in the lowest SpeedStep state and CPU-Z doesn't recognize it.

 

Wow! So it runs full speed dynamically displaying 2fps with zero dropped frames.
Or something

 

Nice slideshow looks like 2-3 fps on average.

 

The HD Asteroid clip takes up about 40-75% of one core of my 3.4 GHz CPU, or roughly 1.36-2.5 GHz. But I have more cache than the C2S and am much faster clock for clock, so either way, no chance that it runs at 800MHz.

 

HA! HA!!!! You can see his internet connection was causing the problem. His connection was not fast enough to buffer the large HD video. Simply too funny IMO.

 

unlikely. the video would have stopped and the "loading circle" would have appeared in the middle.

 

Nice try....you dont even post what CPU you have. Sorry but your post is basically irrelevant....

 

Nope it clearly is pretty choppy.

 

Thats not true for short interrupts like what you see in the video.

 

Now just admit that you were wrong and let us move on with our lives

 

... who cares? Aren't there many more legitimate things to be mad at?

 

It was fully buffered beforehand. The pink bar is too light for my camera to pick up.

 

Seriously people, are you going to waste 10 pages of time and computing power arguing with someone who has no objectivity and flatly ignores contradicting test results?

NBR users must have better things to do.