Information

Did you know you could become an X-bit labs fan on Facebook or follow us on Twitter?



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
The Battle of Low-Power Processors: Best Choice for a Nettop

Started by: CSMR | Date 09/25/08 10:58:35 PM
Comments: 20 | Last Comment:  10/02/08 10:58:36 AM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-8]

1. 
Awful choice of system!
The article is called "low power processors: best choice for a nettop" but then you build high-power, low-performance systems! "A raptor, just the thing for my nettop"!
A low power system based on atom processors should consume about 15W idle, 25W load:
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article867-page5.html
And here is a system that is hugely more powerful than yours and lower-power at the same time (look at E7200 figures):
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article869-page5.html
0 0 [Posted by: CSMR  | Date: 09/25/08 10:58:35 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
ASUS Eee Box uses Atom N-series processor and 945GSE chipset. That is why it has very low power consumption against tested systems based on Atom 230/330.

Let's compare:
Atom N270 (Eee) - 2.5W TDP
Atom 230 (Intel board) - 4W TDP
945GSE (Eee) - 6W TDP
945GC (Intel board) - 22W TDP

ASUS used the netbook platform in Eee, not nettop. And it is really low power as a result. But Intel doesn't sell netbook platform for end users at DIY market and you cannot build Eee-like system. Tested Intel and VIA nettop platforms have minimum power consumption among available choices.
0 0 [Posted by: Gavric  | Date: 09/26/08 04:39:03 AM]
Reply
 
OK, but the system has higher power consumption than much more powerful systems you can build on either the AMD or the Intel platform. For comparison among tested systems, there is some use, but you're not showing what the atom can do when you build a system that takes up as much power as a mainstream desktop.
0 0 [Posted by: CSMR  | Date: 09/26/08 06:04:46 AM]
Reply
 
Thank you for your feedback. This review does not show absolute minimum power consumption of the nettop systems. I had a different idea in mind. And I just compared some systems based on Atom and Nano face to face. These results help to choose a suitable platform for your needs. Building the lowest power system is a different story. In this case I could use "green" 5400RPM HDD, more efficient PSU etc.
0 0 [Posted by: Gavric  | Date: 09/26/08 06:37:14 AM]
Reply
2. 
Hi,

what kind of power supply were you using for the test ?
That could be very important, too.

thx

Bingle
0 0 [Posted by: Bingle  | Date: 09/26/08 02:33:27 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
We have used Enermax ELT620AWT Liberty 620W power supply
0 0 [Posted by: Gavric  | Date: 09/26/08 04:58:54 AM]
Reply
 
Thx for the answer
0 0 [Posted by: Bingle  | Date: 09/26/08 04:21:02 PM]
Reply
 
That powerful power supply might make power consumption results a little skewed or off. You may want to look into anandtech's article on debunking power supply myths.
0 0 [Posted by: jmurbank  | Date: 09/26/08 04:35:18 PM]
Reply
 
This is terrible PSU setup given Atom system eats only 15W. Try a 50-65W PSU. You will understand what I am talking.
0 0 [Posted by: Roy2001  | Date: 10/02/08 10:57:07 AM]
Reply
3. 
There is no AMD systems. Combining Jetway JNC62K, AMD Athlon 64 X2 4850e, and a 2.5 inch hard drive will probably use less than 100 watts. Sure it will consume more power than those setups that you tested, but it will be more powerful and more useful in the graphics area. It can also be used in Linux with out any sacrifice of features.
0 0 [Posted by: jmurbank  | Date: 09/26/08 04:52:29 PM]
Reply
4. 
Good review, however comparing against a low clock celeron M such as the ones used in the original EEE would've been helpful, ie 630mhz or 900mhz celeron m.
0 0 [Posted by: blzd  | Date: 09/26/08 05:28:25 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
I will write separate review to compare Celeron-based and Atom-based netbooks (Eees).
0 0 [Posted by: Gavric  | Date: 09/26/08 05:35:39 PM]
Reply
5. 
Where is Athlon 2000 with 8W TDP ?
0 0 [Posted by: mariusmotea  | Date: 09/27/08 02:32:16 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
AMD low power Athlon 64 2000+ is not a nettop processor. It is embedded part. What is the difference? It's a price point. Total cost of AMD-based low power system in Mini-ITX form-factor will be around $300. But Intel and VIA based nettop platforms are provided in sub-$100 price range.
0 0 [Posted by: Gavric  | Date: 09/27/08 01:42:16 PM]
Reply
6. 
Hi,

are you working together with a Chinese site ?
If not, they copied your article:

http://en.hardspell.com/d...s_id=4155&pageid=3394

Better use watermarks in all your pictures next time ..

cheers

Bingle

P.S: Maybe I should ask about the used power supply there, too ^^
0 0 [Posted by: Bingle  | Date: 09/28/08 08:36:29 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
They've stolen my review, really!
0 0 [Posted by: Gavric  | Date: 09/28/08 08:50:03 AM]
Reply
7. 
Hi, could you please test the HD video decode with a better codec, like CoreAVC; http://www.coreavc.com/
It uses less resources so maybe it would be able to help the Atom systems decode even FullHD material?

Also ATI has it's 2400 card available in PCI format, that offers HD video offload if used with supported applications, Cyberlinks H.264 codec for ATI cards; http://docs.cyberlink.com...264_decoder/enu/index.jsp

EDIT; and on second thought you would need an add in card to do proper HD playback, since it does not support HDCP protection by default... (VGA only)
0 0 [Posted by: Per Hansson  | Date: 09/28/08 12:08:09 PM]
Reply
8. 
Which power supply you are using? My MSI Wind PC barebone based Atom system idled at 20W with a 3.5" HDD. Without it (OS installed on CF card as MB has a CF slot), it consumes only 18W!

Considering the PSU efficency, I would say Atom syste consumes about 15W at idle. It does not make sense to feed a 15W system with a 500W+ PSU which would eats 40W by itself.

Just FYI, my PSU is 65W rated.
0 0 [Posted by: Roy2001  | Date: 09/28/08 10:23:27 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
Please read the author's answer to my post (2nd one) above
0 0 [Posted by: Bingle  | Date: 09/29/08 01:40:58 AM]
Reply
 
Thanks for pointing that out. A 620W PSU for a 15W-30W system? No, power consumption data won't make sense as PSU itself would eats 40W.
0 0 [Posted by: Roy2001  | Date: 10/02/08 10:58:36 AM]
Reply

[1-8]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment


Our Sponsors

Crucial.com Western Digital G.Skill