Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > General Hardware

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 with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-12-2012, 11:43 PM   #1
Turbonium
Golden Member
 
Turbonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,663
Default Am I unspoiled, or do I just have low standards for performance?

I've been using a netbook for the past 2 months for everything, including gaming (limited to older titles). The netbook in question is running a 1 GHz AMD C-60 CPU with 4 GB of RAM, with a 64-bit version of Windows 7.

Right now, I have 61 processes running, with almost 2 GB of RAM being used. Processor usage is stuck at 100%, and there is input lag in this very text box, but that's probably because I'm currently running a Flash app in Firefox, which bogs things down.

All things considered though, the system is fairly response/snappy, and I'm not even using an SSD. I mean, yes, it's SLOW, but it's more than tolerable for regular tasks. The only everyday things that run slow, aside from games, are compressing/decompressing files, and anything Flash. But really, I expected it to be worse. I'm still considering getting another system with a better CPU, but for now (and ignoring the gaming aspect), I can totally see myself using this system for the next 6 months or more without complaints.

Is that weird or what?

Note that my previous system was a 1.6 GHz Core 2 Duo with 2 GB RAM, Intel GMA X3100 graphics (slow, I know), running Vista 32-bit. The CPU was easily more powerful, allowing it to run Flash and such without much of a system slowdown, but this netbook is actually as good or better than it when it comes to games, given the AMD graphics (it runs L4D at above 20 FPS while my old system was sub-10 FPS).

TL;DR: I'm using a netbook. It's not as slow as I thought it'd be. It's actually pretty fast. Am I weird for thinking this?

Last edited by Turbonium; 11-12-2012 at 11:56 PM.
Turbonium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 11:56 PM   #2
OBLAMA2009
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,236
Default

survivin' on a netbook....dayum...
OBLAMA2009 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2012, 12:02 AM   #3
frozentundra123456
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,297
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbonium View Post
I've been using a netbook for the past 2 months for everything, including gaming (limited to older titles). The netbook in question is running a 1 GHz AMD C-60 CPU with 4 GB of RAM, with a 64-bit version of Windows 7.

Right now, I have 61 processes running, with almost 2 GB of RAM being used. Processor usage is stuck at 100%, and there is input lag in this very text box, but that's probably because I'm currently running a Flash app in Firefox, which bogs things down.

All things considered though, the system is fairly response/snappy, and I'm not even using an SSD. I mean, yes, it's SLOW, but it's more than tolerable for regular tasks. The only everyday things that run slow, aside from games, are compressing/decompressing files, and anything Flash. But really, I expected it to be worse. I'm still considering getting another system with a better CPU, but for now (and ignoring the gaming aspect), I can totally see myself using this system for the next 6 months or more without complaints.

Is that weird or what?

Note that my previous system was a 1.6 GHz Core 2 Duo with 2 GB RAM, Intel GMA X3100 graphics (slow, I know), running Vista 32-bit. The CPU was easily more powerful, allowing it to run Flash and such without much of a system slowdown, but this netbook is actually as good or better than it when it comes to games, given the AMD graphics (it runs L4D at above 20 FPS while my old system was sub-10 FPS).

TL;DR: I'm using a netbook. It's not as slow as I thought it'd be. It's actually pretty fast. Am I weird for thinking this?
Each to his own I guess. I bought a tablet instead of a netbook for taking from one lab to another (mainly for browsing and checking e-mail), and sometimes wish I had bought a netbook instead, or something like the dm1z with an E450. If you think a netbook is slow, try an Acer A100 tablet.

Anyway, posters on these forums tend to have high standards for performance. For instance many consider 30 fps unplayable in games, but most of the time is seems perfectly playable to me. As for L4D, the integrated graphics on your old system obviously made it unplayable, but I dont think I would want to play on your netbook either at 20fps. For me, 25 to 30 fps is usually acceptable, but lower than that is annoying.
frozentundra123456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2012, 12:07 AM   #4
Turbonium
Golden Member
 
Turbonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OBLAMA2009 View Post
survivin' on a netbook....dayum...
After a while, you get used to everything being a bit slower, like when you scroll down a web page and it's all choppy, even with smooth-scrolling off.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frozentundra123456 View Post
Each to his own I guess. I bought a tablet instead of a netbook for taking from one lab to another (mainly for browsing and checking e-mail), and sometimes wish I had bought a netbook instead, or something like the dm1z with an E450. If you think a netbook is slow, try an Acer A100 tablet.

Anyway, posters on these forums tend to have high standards for performance. For instance many consider 30 fps unplayable in games, but most of the time is seems perfectly playable to me. As for L4D, the integrated graphics on your old system obviously made it unplayable, but I dont think I would want to play on your netbook either at 20fps. For me, 25 to 30 fps is usually acceptable, but lower than that is annoying.
Well, normally, I wouldn't consider anything under 30FPS to be playable, but I actually played through an entire L4D chapter on my old system (literally 4-5 FPS most of the time), so 21+ FPS on this netbook is amazingly good.
Turbonium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2012, 10:31 AM   #5
VirtualLarry
Lifer
 
VirtualLarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,659
Default

I like my C-60 based Acer Aspire One 722 Netbook. I added a 120GB Vertex Plus R2 SSD, which makes it a bit more snappy, but only a bit, because the slow CPU in the netbook limits it.

I was surprised to discover that my new Intel Sandy Bridge-based Pentium B970 dual-core Netbook (14" laptop minus DVD drive) was as slow as the C-60, when on battery power. It also gets comparable battery life. Apparently, the Asus software throttles the CPU down to its lowest speed when on battery.
__________________
Rig(s) not listed, because I change computers, like some people change their socks.
ATX is for poor people. And 'gamers.' - phucheneh
haswell is bulldozer... - aigomorla
"DON'T BUY INTEL, they will send secret signals down the internet, which
will considerably slow down your computer". - SOFTengCOMPelec
VirtualLarry is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2012, 10:45 AM   #6
Eureka
Diamond Member
 
Eureka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,826
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualLarry View Post
I like my C-60 based Acer Aspire One 722 Netbook. I added a 120GB Vertex Plus R2 SSD, which makes it a bit more snappy, but only a bit, because the slow CPU in the netbook limits it.

I was surprised to discover that my new Intel Sandy Bridge-based Pentium B970 dual-core Netbook (14" laptop minus DVD drive) was as slow as the C-60, when on battery power. It also gets comparable battery life. Apparently, the Asus software throttles the CPU down to its lowest speed when on battery.
That may also have to do with Windows as well.. in your power settings, if you go into advanced you'll see that Windows (at least Win7) will throttle down CPU on battery by default.

As for OP, everyone has different standards of minimum performance. I used a netbook for a couple years in high school, it's fine for most purposes but I would've liked the ability to use flash reliably.
__________________
San Francisco: ASRock Z87E-ITX | Intel i7-4770k | 16 GB DDR3 1600 | Gigabyte WF3 7950
Honolulu: Gigabyte MA790X-UD4P | AMD Phenom II X4 955 | 8GB DDR2 800 | Sapphire HD4890
London: ASRock 4CoreDual-VSTA | Intel Dual Core E7400 @ 3.1ghz | 2GB DDR2 667 | ATi X850 XT @ 540/590
Eureka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2012, 11:24 AM   #7
Dman8777
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 375
Default

I lived for 4 years with nothing but an eee 900 (900 mhz celeron m). Forget about flash websites and any game newer than diablo 2
Dman8777 is offline   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 11:16 PM.


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