Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals
· Free Stuff
· Contests and Sweepstakes
· Black Friday 2013
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-18-2012, 11:12 AM   #1
mikeymikec
Diamond Member
 
mikeymikec's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,614
Default Does anyone here have an AMD E-450?

I've just seen a system with it stuttering like mad with a Flash game. Does anyone have the same problem and processor?

Switching off desktop composition made it perform significantly better.

The system in question has Win7-64, plenty of RAM and the latest AMD graphics drivers. Processor usage was just going nuts in any browser while playing the Flash game. I checked silly things like whether someone had set the processor to only go up to 50% of its potential, but it was going the full 1.65GHz.

I realise it's not meant as say a valid alternative to the Core i3 or the Pentium G620, but I would have thought anything except a netbook processor would handle a Flash game, unless someone goes and ports Quake 4 onto Flash
mikeymikec is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 11:14 AM   #2
borisvodofsky
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,606
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeymikec View Post
I've just seen a system with it stuttering like mad with a Flash game. Does anyone have the same problem and processor?

Switching off desktop composition made it perform significantly better.

The system in question has Win7-64, plenty of RAM and the latest AMD graphics drivers. Processor usage was just going nuts in any browser while playing the Flash game. I checked silly things like whether someone had set the processor to only go up to 50% of its potential, but it was going the full 1.65GHz.

I realise it's not meant as say a valid alternative to the Core i3 or the Pentium G620, but I would have thought anything except a netbook processor would handle a Flash game, unless someone goes and ports Quake 4 onto Flash
Flash games suck, stop playing them, and get back to work.

I use the default old school windows theme with Everything turned off, and optimized for performance.

on my e350, flash is pretty smooth as Long as I'm playing it at the little box resolution in the window. It chokes when I make it bigger.
__________________
2500k | 4.8ghz | 1.33v
borisvodofsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 11:18 AM   #3
pantsaregood
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 886
Default

Make sure the GPU drivers are up to date.

Also, leaving desktop composition on usually results in a performance boost because it offloads onto the GPU.
pantsaregood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 11:35 AM   #4
sm625
Diamond Member
 
sm625's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,321
Default

Some flash games, like BTD5, can bring a 4.5 GHz i5-3570k to its knees.
__________________
I am looking for a cheap upgrade to my 3 year old computer.
AT forum member #1: Buy a 4770k

I am looking for a way to get 10 more fps in TF2.
AT forum member #2: Buy a 4770k
sm625 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 12:51 PM   #5
Puppies04
Diamond Member
 
Puppies04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,498
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeymikec View Post
I've just seen a system with it stuttering like mad with a Flash game. Does anyone have the same problem and processor?

Switching off desktop composition made it perform significantly better.

The system in question has Win7-64, plenty of RAM and the latest AMD graphics drivers. Processor usage was just going nuts in any browser while playing the Flash game. I checked silly things like whether someone had set the processor to only go up to 50% of its potential, but it was going the full 1.65GHz.

I realise it's not meant as say a valid alternative to the Core i3 or the Pentium G620, but I would have thought anything except a netbook processor would handle a Flash game, unless someone goes and ports Quake 4 onto Flash
Got to ask because you don't mention it.....was flash player properly updated?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by [B
alkemyst[/B];35121925]I am the real deal while those like yourself threaten while hiding behind the screen.
Puppies04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 01:31 PM   #6
happysmiles
Senior Member
 
happysmiles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 344
Default

what browser are you using?
happysmiles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 01:48 PM   #7
lau808
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Pukalani Maui
Posts: 217
Default

i have one. what flash game was being played? i can check it out tonight
__________________
Main: Athlon II X2 3.0Ghz/4gb ddr3/500GB HDD
Work:I5-2400/4 GB ddr3/500GB HDD
Laptop: Asus A53U-E-450/750GB HDD/4GB DDR3
Next Rig: FX8350/NH-D14/Sabertooth 990FX/8GB 1866/OCZ Vector 128GB/HD7850/Antec 302/HCG-620
lau808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 01:50 PM   #8
beginner99
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeymikec View Post
but I would have thought anything except a netbook processor would handle a Flash game
It is a netbook processor...
beginner99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 02:09 PM   #9
ShintaiDK
Diamond Member
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 9,519
Default

Bobcat/Atom is just extremely weak compared to regular CPUs. They are essentially extremely shortterm lifetime. unless you accept the rapid degrade over the relatively short timeperiod. New codec and its dead for HTPC, some flash or new flash and its dead for flashgames in browsers. HTML5 can kill them too, even youtube.

Bobcat/Atom is borderlining to the use and throw away. They are born obsolete.
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 03:30 PM   #10
Olikan
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,724
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Bobcat/Atom is just extremely weak compared to regular CPUs. They are essentially extremely shortterm lifetime. unless you accept the rapid degrade over the relatively short timeperiod. New codec and its dead for HTPC, some flash or new flash and its dead for flashgames in browsers. HTML5 can kill them too, even youtube.

Bobcat/Atom is borderlining to the use and throw away. They are born obsolete.
they are born for batery life...
Olikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 05:28 PM   #11
ninaholic37
Senior Member
 
ninaholic37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 356
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Bobcat/Atom is just extremely weak compared to regular CPUs. They are essentially extremely shortterm lifetime. unless you accept the rapid degrade over the relatively short timeperiod. New codec and its dead for HTPC, some flash or new flash and its dead for flashgames in browsers. HTML5 can kill them too, even youtube.

Bobcat/Atom is borderlining to the use and throw away. They are born obsolete.
I've always liked the 10 inch netbook form factor (and 8.9 when they were still being made), and have been using them exclusively since 2008 for everything. There really isn't anything I can't do on them that I want to... though everyone's computer needs/uses are different. I guess the same thing you wrote could be said about iPad owners (generally costs like twice as much as Atoms/Bobcats, and millions of people still buy them).

I'm eager to see what Silvermont/Kabini might bring to the table in 2013 though, or if Haswell/Kaveri (next gen Ivy Bridge/Trinity) ULV variants may reach power levels low enough to make the "Atom/Bobcat" counterparts obsolete for small laptops. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds...

Last edited by ninaholic37; 06-18-2012 at 05:38 PM.
ninaholic37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 05:38 PM   #12
thelastjuju
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 444
Default

Don't have one, but I've used them.. they are perfectly capable for every day use. I think it depends on the hardware you are accustomed to. For ordinary users, its fine.

But they won't be zippy fast. You'll get that random lag and slowdown here and there but only something someone with more enthusiast grade hardware would notice and might be bothered by anyway.
thelastjuju is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 08:37 PM   #13
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 10,795
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Bobcat/Atom is just extremely weak compared to regular CPUs. They are essentially extremely shortterm lifetime. unless you accept the rapid degrade over the relatively short timeperiod. New codec and its dead for HTPC, some flash or new flash and its dead for flashgames in browsers. HTML5 can kill them too, even youtube.

Bobcat/Atom is borderlining to the use and throw away. They are born obsolete.
I have an E-450 netbook. I disagree with your assessment. Atom is slightly slower than Pentium 4 clock for clock. Bobcat, however, is a bit faster than K8 clock for clock.

Povray benchmarks, v3.6.1 (single thread only)

Pentium 4m, 1.5 GHz, Debian 7, gcc 4.6.1, -march=pentium4m
Parse Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 5 seconds (5 seconds)
Photon Time: 0 hours 2 minutes 8 seconds (128 seconds)
Render Time: 1 hours 5 minutes 36 seconds (3936 seconds)
Total Time: 1 hours 7 minutes 49 seconds (4069 seconds)

Atom N270, 1.6 GHz, Ubuntu 11, icc 11.1, -xSSE3_ATOM
Parse Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 4 seconds (4 seconds)
Photon Time: 0 hours 1 minutes 31 seconds (91 seconds)
Render Time: 1 hours 23 minutes 16 seconds (4996 seconds)
Total Time: 1 hours 24 minutes 51 seconds (5091 seconds)

Povray 3.7 benchmark (multi-threaded)

Turion x2, 1.8 GHz, Ubuntu 11, gcc 4.5.2, -march=k8
Render Time:
Photon Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 6 seconds (6.206 seconds)
using 5 thread(s) with 7.180 CPU-seconds total
Radiosity Time: No radiosity
Trace Time: 0 hours 32 minutes 31 seconds (1951.608 seconds)
using 2 thread(s) with 3890.260 CPU-seconds total


AMD E-450 @ 1.65 GHz, Ubuntu 12.04, gcc 4.6, -march=bareclona
Render Time:
Photon Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 6 seconds (6.483 seconds)
using 5 thread(s) with 7.504 CPU-seconds total
Radiosity Time: No radiosity
Trace Time: 0 hours 27 minutes 19 seconds (1639.816 seconds)
using 2 thread(s) with 3270.613 CPU-seconds total
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉

Last edited by jhu; 06-18-2012 at 08:39 PM.
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 08:40 PM   #14
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 10,795
Default

Also, I've been playing Diablo III on this thing. It only started bogging down in Hell difficulty for some reason.
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 11:32 PM   #15
beginner99
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Bobcat/Atom is just extremely weak compared to regular CPUs. They are essentially extremely shortterm lifetime. unless you accept the rapid degrade over the relatively short timeperiod. New codec and its dead for HTPC, some flash or new flash and its dead for flashgames in browsers. HTML5 can kill them too, even youtube.

Bobcat/Atom is borderlining to the use and throw away. They are born obsolete.
More or less agree but I just used my aging eeepc T91 for 3 weeks. This has a z520 Atom (single-core with HT). I use it with Jolicloud (distro based of ubuntu). browsing works perfectly fine and it can actually play standard 720p mkv rips.
beginner99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 11:37 PM   #16
borisvodofsky
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,606
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beginner99 View Post
More or less agree but I just used my aging eeepc T91 for 3 weeks. This has a z520 Atom (single-core with HT). I use it with Jolicloud (distro based of ubuntu). browsing works perfectly fine and it can actually play standard 720p mkv rips.
pssshh. z520 can only play those mkvs with all the cool stuff disabled. and renderer at lowest possible setting.

It's got nothing on e450 which can do 1080p like butter. That said, if you have the e450 render subtitles, booooom, frame drop.
__________________
2500k | 4.8ghz | 1.33v
borisvodofsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 11:40 PM   #17
ninaholic37
Senior Member
 
ninaholic37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 356
Default

Quote:
Atom is slightly slower than Pentium 4 clock for clock. Bobcat, however, is a bit faster than K8 clock for clock.
Interesting. I tried that POV-Ray program on two of my Aspire One netbooks also, and here were the results:

Povray v3.6.2

Atom N2600, 1.6Ghz, Win7 Starter
Parse Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 4 seconds (4 seconds)
Photon Time: 0 hours 1 minutes 48 seconds (108 seconds)
Render Time: 0 hours 44 minutes 43 seconds (2683 seconds)
Total Time: 0 hours 46 minutes 35 seconds (2795 seconds)
Render averaged 70.33 PPS

AMD C-50, 1.0Ghz, Win7 Starter
Parse Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 3 seconds (3 seconds)
Photon Time: 0 hours 1 minutes 18 seconds (78 seconds)
Render Time: 0 hours 29 minutes 18 seconds (1758 seconds)
Total Time: 0 hours 30 minutes 39 seconds (1839 seconds)
Render averaged 106.97 PPS

Povray v3.7

Atom N2600, 1.6Ghz, Win7 Starter
Photon Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 19 seconds (19.173 seconds)
using 7 thread(s) with 22.323 CPU-seconds total
Trace Time: 0 hours 14 minutes 17 seconds (857.487 seconds)
using 4 thread(s) with 3408.183 CPU-seconds total

Render averaged 222.74 PPS (57.18 PPS CPU time)

AMD C-50, 1.0Ghz, Win7 Starter
Photon Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 14 seconds (14.430 seconds)
using 5 thread(s) with 16.176 CPU-seconds total
Trace Time: 0 hours 16 minutes 17 seconds (977.373 seconds)
using 2 thread(s) with 1937.220 CPU-seconds total

Render averaged 197.17 PPS (100.36 PPS CPU time)

Just for comparison. Both OSs are set up pretty much the same.
ninaholic37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 04:58 AM   #18
cebalrai
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 243
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeymikec View Post
I've just seen a system with it stuttering like mad with a Flash game. Does anyone have the same problem and processor?

Switching off desktop composition made it perform significantly better.

The system in question has Win7-64, plenty of RAM and the latest AMD graphics drivers. Processor usage was just going nuts in any browser while playing the Flash game. I checked silly things like whether someone had set the processor to only go up to 50% of its potential, but it was going the full 1.65GHz.

I realise it's not meant as say a valid alternative to the Core i3 or the Pentium G620, but I would have thought anything except a netbook processor would handle a Flash game, unless someone goes and ports Quake 4 onto Flash

You should have GPU assist on flash games with the E-450. Sounds like it's not working for some reason.
cebalrai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 05:04 AM   #19
pantsaregood
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 886
Default

As for Flash games being laggy, you should also remember that it is generally Flash that is at fault more than your CPU.

Adobe puts out some really garbage software. Flash Player and Acrobat Reader can bog down my 2500K sometimes, often for no apparent reason.
pantsaregood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 04:28 PM   #20
mikeymikec
Diamond Member
 
mikeymikec's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,614
Default

Someone mentioned keeping the Flash plug-in up-to-date - two things here - I think the Flash plug-in is automatically updated in Chrome isn't it? Secondly, the problem was also experienced in Firefox.
mikeymikec is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 05:41 AM   #21
Joey Bogaars
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2
Default Problems with my AMD E450/Radeon 6320

Hi everybody,

I bought a Compaq CQ57 with a E-450+Radeon 6320 and to be onest, this system is unstable and rubbish, i've tried everything to make it better but it doesn't work at all. The CPU get stuck when im multitasking and the screen is hanging when i play youtube-clips/video's. This is kinda annoying, the CPU is way TOO unstable, the Radeon 6320 is quite good...the graphics seems to be good enough if it doesn't lag. But the system overall is, not good at all. I have a tweaked Windows 7 x64 Ultimate and even that doesn't work. I replaced my HDD for a SSD and even that doesnt work, i bought 2GB extra RAM but even that seems not to bring every difference. AMD-Overdrive doesn't work on this CPU/GPU. What to do? Overclocking is impossible, more RAM isn't a option. Please help me out and give me some options.

I've expected more of this E2 system of AMD.

Gr. Joey
Joey Bogaars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 06:24 AM   #22
dma0991
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,616
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Bogaars View Post
I've expected more of this E2 system of AMD.
I think there is an underlying problem with your laptop than the APU itself. My E-350 desktop isn't perfect but it gets the job done, almost. While the CPU utilization is high, there is not much noticeable lag. Maybe a stutter ever so often but definitely not bad enough to be a lag. Check if the laptop is too hot as thermal throttling might have kicked in when you're stressing the APU.
__________________
Intel Core i5 3570K [4.5GHz @ 1.28V]|MSI Z77A-GD65|Samsung MV-3V4G3D 16GB 1866MHz@9-9-9-24/1.35V|Powercolor HD4650|Corsair Force GT 120GB|Samsung F3 1TB|Corsair CX500|Corsair 400R|XSPC Raystorm + XSPC EX240 + EK DCP 4.0
Intel Core i7 2600|ASRock H61M/U3S3|Kingston HyperX 8GB|Intel HD2000|WD Blue 320GB|Samsung F4EG 2TB|WD Green 2TB|WD Green 3TB|WD Green 3TB|FSP SAGA II 500W|CM Elite 343
| |
dma0991 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 07:03 AM   #23
Insert_Nickname
Golden Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,452
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Bobcat/Atom is just extremely weak compared to regular CPUs. They are essentially extremely shortterm lifetime. unless you accept the rapid degrade over the relatively short timeperiod. New codec and its dead for HTPC, some flash or new flash and its dead for flashgames in browsers. HTML5 can kill them too, even youtube.

Bobcat/Atom is borderlining to the use and throw away. They are born obsolete.
I wouldn't say that. My NAS runs on a ASUS C60M1-I board. That's Brazos at 1.00-1.33GHz. Its not high performance, but that's not required for simple storage purposes. And it sips power too...
Insert_Nickname is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 07:17 AM   #24
ShintaiDK
Diamond Member
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 9,519
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Insert_Nickname View Post
I wouldn't say that. My NAS runs on a ASUS C60M1-I board. That's Brazos at 1.00-1.33GHz. Its not high performance, but that's not required for simple storage purposes. And it sips power too...
But thats a tiny niche segment.
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 07:24 AM   #25
Fox5
Diamond Member
 
Fox5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,599
Default

Get Windows 8, it makes a nice upgrade for those slow processors.
__________________
ebay
Look up bluefox451

heatware
http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=35565
Fox5 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.