The Netbook Thread

[Kemper_Boyd]

Dell showed off this. No specs but it is a dinky laptop.
http://gizmodo.com/393815/exclusive-del ... ini-laptop

[Kemper_Boyd]

Those benchmarks would be a hell of a lot more useful with the power.
Atom has a TDP of 2W at 1.6 GHz, as far as I know Via has not disclosed
TDP for Isaiah yet. It is said to be 20 W at 2.0 GHz, if so I'd be surprised
if Isaiah is under 10 W at 1.6 GHz and stock voltages.

I know it's 3.5W at 1GHz from those benchmarks from last week, I can't see it jumping to 10W for an extra 600MHz.

It would roughly fit if it's a 1.0 GHz LV part to a 1.6 GHz stock part.

I've not been able to find a statement from Via saying what Isaiah's power
is. They've said the performance is 2x C7 at the same power, which does fit
the benchmarks. The 20W TDP at 2.0 GHz figure is the only one I've found
that is said to be verified by Centaur.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.h ... VzaWFzdA==

Let's assume that 3.5 W at 1.0 GHz is correct, and that we can trust
CrystalMark. If we can then the 1.0 GHz Isaiah is slower than Atom and
would still use more power, and likely cost quite a bit more to make.

I know I keep making the same point but a single core 2.0 GHz 20 W part will
find it tough competing against Merom and Penryn, never mind Atom.

*bump*

http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/processors/nano/

It's not 3.5 W at 1.0 GHz it's 5 W, so Atom is more efficient.
Using 2 W at 1.6 and 2.4 at 1.86. Also Via fall right into the
low voltage Penryn territory.

Initial production versions of the 1.0 GHz VIA Nano ULV processor will have a maximum Thermal Design Power (TDP) of just 5 watts (and an idle power of just 100mW), scaling up to 25.5 watts for the 1.8 GHz VIA Nano processor (500mW idle power).

25.5 W at 1.8 GHz, yikes!

[Dio]

And Dell too... looks interesting from the early notes, notably because they've gone for the standard 1280x800 resolution.

[Firefox]

And Dell too... looks interesting from the early notes, notably because they've gone for the standard 1280x800 resolution.

Yeah, I noticed that. I can imagine being quite productive with a screen that resolution...

Ctrl in the bottom-left corner where nature intended it to be, too.

[HGFB]

I'd just like to say that Peggle, Gish and Terror From The Deep all work perfectly on my 701 (2gig ram, XP) and the Eee is very easy to overclock

Gish needed a tweak in the config.txt to set it to 800x480 but then worked fine.

Overclocked even Dwarf Fortress is tolerable if a little slow. I'm really looking forward to getting a 901 now. The extra speed and disk space will be very welcome.

[Firefox]

The extra speed and disk space will be very welcome.

Um, a 1.6GHz Atom is actually a little bit slower than a 0.9GHz Pentium-M, it just glugs down a lot less juice.



I'm hoping the new EeePcs will be fanless. That's about the only thing I dislike about my 700, the arthritic little fan that starts whining when I watch youtube...

[HGFB]

That's a bit shit.

[Kronos]

The extra speed and disk space will be very welcome.

Um, a 1.6GHz Atom is actually a little bit slower than a 0.9GHz Pentium-M, it just glugs down a lot less juice.



I'm hoping the new EeePcs will be fanless. That's about the only thing I dislike about my 700, the arthritic little fan that starts whining when I watch youtube...

And even worse, on that graph, it is SLOWER than a Pentium III-M on a mhz per mhz basis too!

[Firefox]

That's a bit shit.

Well, no. Apparently the 901 will have "four to six hours battery life", which will be nice.

[Ely]

Yup, more battery life and less heat/noise would suit my fine to be honest. I'm looking to get an 901 in September if they are readily available then.

[Kemper_Boyd]

And even worse, on that graph, it is SLOWER than a Pentium III-M on a mhz per mhz basis too!

But that Pentium III M uses about 10 times as much power, and it
lacks a lot of the features that Atom has.

That SuperPI result might have been from an engineering sample
as two more recent tests of 1.6 GHz parts have both reported
1m 32s for the 1M score.

[HGFB]

My 700 is quite a nice little Mame machine. It'll handle Space Harrier with no problems when clocked at 900. I might take my 360 joypad with me to Canada

[Kronos]

And even worse, on that graph, it is SLOWER than a Pentium III-M on a mhz per mhz basis too!

But that Pentium III M uses about 10 times as much power, and it
lacks a lot of the features that Atom has.

That SuperPI result might have been from an engineering sample
as two more recent tests of 1.6 GHz parts have both reported
1m 32s for the 1M score.

The comparison is unfair I know as the battery will be a lot smaller than the one in an almost 3 hour lasting Dell Latitude I took on holiday recently. Just [unfairly] looked like a 1.2ghz IBM T23 CPU performance wise on the graph there. Different type of machine for a different market really so have to see it running in person and take it from there for me personally.

Any more info on that ultraportable Dell a few posts up?

[Kemper_Boyd]

http://www.engadget.com/2008/06/02/hand ... ee-pc-901/

[HGFB]

To be honest I might take a 900 if you could actually buy them anywhere still. I'm guessing the UK launch of the 901 won't be that far behind the US launch if they've taken the 900s off the shelves.

20gig Linux model for me. I'll slap my own copy of XP on it.