AMD E1-2500 (1.4GHz) enough for office work?

[Jimzz]

Yea its not a bad CPU but not meant to be a desktop replacement like HP is trying to use it, let alone at that price.

 

[Asterox]

what hyperbole, the e1-2500 is a faster system than a 2.8GHz single core pentium and uses close to an order of magnitude less power.

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/253483?baseline=83115
e1-2500 vs pentium 4 511

the performance will be fine for office tasks but just dont expect much multitasking.

This comparison really does not make any sense, in today's time that comparison can be reduced to what is most important.

For god's sake E1-2500 this is APU', and P4 is ancient and outdated/garbage(it was crap when it came out brand new) classic processor who at least has five times higher power consumption.

- Intel P4 511 briefly and clearly this is [rubbish]

- AMD E1-2500 APU cheap chocolate so enjoy

No profanity in the tech forums, please
-ViRGE

 

[Enigmoid]

This comparison really does not make any sense, in today's time that comparison can be reduced to what is most important.

For god's sake E1-2500 this is APU', and P4 is ancient and outdated/garbage(it was crap when it came out brand new) classic processor who at least has five times higher power consumption.

- Intel P4 511 briefly and clearly this is [rubbish]

- AMD E1-2500 APU cheap chocolate so enjoy

We are simply looking at performance. Not power consumption.

Simply put dual Kabini at 1.4 ghz is crap. Its usable yes but unpleasant for multitasking. It has no place in a desktop system. We are talking about a CPU that is weaker than a lot of phones for crying out loud.

There is no point to this CPU when a cheap pentium for $20-40 more will give about 4x the performance.

As this appears to be a 'use it until it breaks' computer, getting a slightly better CPU is important.

 

[crashtech]

This comparison really does not make any sense, in today's time that comparison can be reduced to what is most important.

For god's sake E1-2500 this is APU', and P4 is ancient and outdated/garbage(it was crap when it came out brand new) classic processor who at least has five times higher power consumption.

- Intel P4 511 briefly and clearly this is [rubbish]

- AMD E1-2500 APU cheap chocolate so enjoy

Yes, his comparison makes no sense, but comparing CPUs to chocolate does make sense. Some cheap chocolate, like Palmer, is so full of paraffin wax that it is only suitable for undiscriminating little fat kids. The E1-2500 is like Palmer chocolate.

 

[monstercameron]

Yes, his comparison makes no sense, but comparing CPUs to chocolate does make sense. Some cheap chocolate, like Palmer, is so full of paraffin wax that it is only suitable for undiscriminating little fat kids. The E1-2500 is like Palmer chocolate.

my comparison makes alot of sense in context.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36125437&postcount=15

It's terrible. I mean it. It's HORRIBLE.

How bad is it? I rebuilt a Pentium 4 2.8Ghz Dell from 2003 the other day, and IT was faster and more capable.

this was what I was responding to...

 

[Homeles]

my comparison makes alot of sense in context.

I think he was mocking Asterox.

 

[crashtech]

my comparison makes alot of sense in context.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36125437&postcount=15


this was what I was responding to...

A careful reading of the thread would reveal that I mildly chastised Arkaign for making such an inflammatory and somewhat unfair comparison.

But even AMD affectionados can't expect CPU enthusiasts here to take the E1 seriously. At the least give us an A4, the E1 is weak sauce.

 

[MrK6]

My parents are pretty much in the same boat and about a year and a half ago I ended up getting them a 2320 from the Dell Outlet for $350 shipped + tax. Specs were 23" All-in-One, 1080p screen, Intel G630 CPU with integrated graphics, 4GB RAM, 500GB 7200RPM HDD, wifi, the works. I recommend overbuying a bit as I imagine she'll like to keep the computer for awhile.

I looked through the Dell outlet as that HP seemed expensive for what (little) you were getting, but I couldn't find anything much better. Market sucks atm I'm guessing. Still though, keep an eye on Dell's inventory as well as coupons and you never know.

 

[Cerb]

Given that it's not mobile nor embedded, even the A4s would be awfully weak, as the cost to move up IB CPUs is so small.

 

[Arkaign]

Given that it's not mobile nor embedded, even the A4s would be awfully weak, as the cost to move up IB CPUs is so small.

True, the downward price pressure makes a difficult case for recommending a slower CPU when a much faster one can often be found for the same, a little less, or a little more in the final system cost.

However, I feel that the A4 is a decent processor for average use. The E1 just isn't. It's agonizing to think about people buying these things in 2014. In the case of the OP, the system was $459, then an alternative was found with a dramatically superior product (in multiple levels, even Display, USB, SATA, PCIe controller, etc) for $10 less.

However, perhaps in a Chromebook or something similar, the E1 wouldn't be such a drag. I have only used them with Win7 and Win8, and can't recommend them.

The point of comparing them to a P4 was VERY cogent, because in ST performance the E1 1.4Ghz is slower than a 10+ year old CPU that wasn't widely lauded even at the time. That's something that shouldn't happen. An A4-6300 for example is faster in every conceivable way than a P4 2.8, by a huge margin. An E1 is just self-inflicted pain.

And think of the borderline computer competence of the average non-enthusiast user. These are people that will leave apps open without realizing it, get a bunch of add-ons installed because they don't read the fine print, and typically install the worst AV products imaginable along the way. So you end up with Search Conduit, a couple of toolbars, Coupon Genie or whatever, etc. An already borderline unusable system becomes a 21st century version of a rack from the Spanish Inquisition.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

But even AMD affectionados can't expect CPU enthusiasts here to take the E1 seriously. At the least give us an A4, the E1 is weak sauce.

However, I feel that the A4 is a decent processor for average use. The E1 just isn't. It's agonizing to think about people buying these things in 2014. In the case of the OP, the system was $459, then an alternative was found with a dramatically superior product (in multiple levels, even Display, USB, SATA, PCIe controller, etc) for $10 less.

However, perhaps in a Chromebook or something similar, the E1 wouldn't be such a drag. I have only used them with Win7 and Win8, and can't recommend them.

The point of comparing them to a P4 was VERY cogent, because in ST performance the E1 1.4Ghz is slower than a 10+ year old CPU that wasn't widely lauded even at the time. That's something that shouldn't happen. An A4-6300 for example is faster in every conceivable way than a P4 2.8, by a huge margin. An E1 is just self-inflicted pain.

And think of the borderline computer competence of the average non-enthusiast user. These are people that will leave apps open without realizing it, get a bunch of add-ons installed because they don't read the fine print, and typically install the worst AV products imaginable along the way. So you end up with Search Conduit, a couple of toolbars, Coupon Genie or whatever, etc. An already borderline unusable system becomes a 21st century version of a rack from the Spanish Inquisition.

Personally I wouldn't touch anything less then the top-end A6-5200 with a ten-foot pole. Brazos/Kabini systems are simply a pain to use, and a complete nightmare to do system maintenance on...

The problem is, as you well pointed out Arkaign, is that most average users don't know any better. They look at the price tag, and go "oooh - cheap" and "I don't want to spend that much", even when its something they use for hours practically everyday. Me, I want to throw such systems out the window...

 

[TeknoBug]

For office uses i would go with a a6-5200 at least.

^ that, well I have an A4 5000 which is also perfectly suitable. I avoid the AMD E* chips after testing demos with them, it doesn't even play Youtube videos smoothly.

15.6" laptops with A4 5000 or A6 5200 can be found for $329-349 here in Canada.

 

[AtenRa]

I have played with the Samsung ATIV with an AMD mobile A6-1450 a Quad Core 1GHz base and up to 1.4GHz turbo that has a 128GB SSD and Win 8 and I was positively surprised with the experience. I dont recommend any dual core Kabini or ATOMs but any Quad Core Desktop SOC from both AMD or Intel with an SSD will be fine for everyday use and light office work.

What ever you choose to buy, better spend more for the SSD than the CPU. But if you going for an entry level AMD/Intel SOC, choose a Quad Core and pare it with an SSD.

For an example, it is better to get the AMD E2-3800 (Quad Core 1.3GHz) or Intel Quad Core Baytrail with an SSD than an Ivybridge/Haswell dual core Celeron with mechanical HDD.

 

[SPBHM]

no reason to suffer with such a low ST performance when you are not constrained by battery and so on,
G1610 and G1820 are way better solutions than Kabini/Bay Trail for desktop usage,

E1-2500 ST (kabini at 1.4GHz) score on cinebench is 0.35
G1820 is 1.19

quad core is not going to improve st performance, and the gap is so huge that even for MT... no chance.

I think this kind of difference can be noticed on real world usage,

 

[Abwx]

For (very) low cost DT a good option is a mini ITX form factor
if you can get your hands on a 4C 2.05Ghz Kabini, there s
even MBs that have a DC connector to plug a brick PSU.

http://www.hardware.fr/news/13598/amd-annonce-plateforme-am1.html

 

[TuxDave]

I'm looking to get an all in one (due to limited desktop space) for my mom to use at work - is the AMD E1-2500 (1.4GHz) CPU going to cut it for Windows 8.1, strictly for office work? It'll be used for emails basically 90% of the time and occasional web surfing. Word/Excel won't be used much if at all.

Thanks!

Are there really office jobs that only require email and you never open up a word or excel document? That's mind boggling to me.

I agree with the majority in this thread. You can go cheap but that's just waaay too far down the cheap and crappy route. If your usage model changes and you finally need to use MS Office, are you just going to toss this out the window and get another one?

I made the same mistake when I bought the original Atom based netbook. "It's a cheap web-surfing machine". But then when you actually want to use it for anything else, it's complete crap and I eventually got rid of it because I couldn't keep the usage model so limited. Why limit yourself to the utmost basic of tasks.

 

[AtenRa]

no reason to suffer with such a low ST performance when you are not constrained by battery and so on,
G1610 and G1820 are way better solutions than Kabini/Bay Trail for desktop usage,

E1-2500 ST (kabini at 1.4GHz) score on cinebench is 0.35
G1820 is 1.19

quad core is not going to improve st performance, and the gap is so huge that even for MT... no chance.

I think this kind of difference can be noticed on real world usage,

The tasks the particular user will do needs SSD performance and not CPU ST performance. The user experience will be greater with a Quad Core Kabini/BayTrail + SSD than Dual Core Celeron + HDD.
Pointing out the ST performance difference in Cinebench has nothing to do with user experience opening programs such as MS Outlook etc. Also, when Outlook will have 2-4K mails it will be the SSD that will be faster than any HDD to search and open the files.

 

[SPBHM]

The tasks the particular user will do needs SSD performance and not CPU ST performance. The user experience will be greater with a Quad Core Kabini/BayTrail + SSD than Dual Core Celeron + HDD.
Pointing out the ST performance difference in Cinebench has nothing to do with user experience opening programs such as MS Outlook etc. Also, when Outlook will have 2-4K mails it will be the SSD that will be faster than any HDD to search and open the files.

why can't you have a Celeron with an SSD!?
these things are so cheap anyway,

the CB difference was to show there is a gain of around 200% for ST workload, I think this kind of difference is useful for basic usage and can be noticed,

 

[krumme]

What she need for speed is a good keyboard and screen.

It's mail guys. You talk the usual way.

A few extra $ always get you better hardware at the buttom. And in this case keyboard quality and screen is of most importance not St perf or ssd if the priorities should make sense.

 

[AtenRa]

why can't you have a Celeron with an SSD!?
these things are so cheap anyway,

the CB difference was to show there is a gain of around 200% for ST workload, I think this kind of difference is useful for basic usage and can be noticed,

You can have any CPU/APU/SoC with an SSD, the thing is the OP has a low budget. Obviously a Celeron/Pentium or higher CPU with an SSD will be better, but I was trying to stay as close to the budget as possible with the Systems available in the HP site.
Also, i was trying to show that even those Entry level SoCs when pared with an SSD they are fine for everyday usage (Browsing, office, play videos etc.)

 

[Fjodor2001]

I'm looking to get an all in one (due to limited desktop space) for my mom to use at work - is the AMD E1-2500 (1.4GHz) CPU going to cut it for Windows 8.1, strictly for office work? It'll be used for emails basically 90% of the time and occasional web surfing. Word/Excel won't be used much if at all.

Thanks!

PS. Rest of the specs: 4GB RAM, 500GB HD, integrated Radeon 8240 http://shopping.hp.com/en_US/home-of...C-ENERGY-STAR-

Just wondering if it absolutely has to be an AMD E1-2500?

Why not one of the AMD Kabini Desktop CPUs to be released April 9? See:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7824/amd-am1-platform-announced-socketed-kabini

 

[escrow4]

You can have any CPU/APU/SoC with an SSD, the thing is the OP has a low budget. Obviously a Celeron/Pentium or higher CPU with an SSD will be better, but I was trying to stay as close to the budget as possible with the Systems available in the HP site.
Also, i was trying to show that even those Entry level SoCs when pared with an SSD they are fine for everyday usage (Browsing, office, play videos etc.)

I still doubt this. I found a G1610 rather poky and slow for my needs. Sure, I could up with it, but I'd be itching to upgrade. And really, if a user is upgrading from a P4, Kabini won't see much difference - Windows is still a rather fat OS and needs some grunt behind it.

 

[crashtech]

This shouldn't be about Intel vs AMD, but it always is. What it is really about is why should anyone be saddled with something so slow for a desktop, when it's so much easier and better to get something that will do the job so much better for the same money or less?

The only reason I can see to put a 15W chip in a desktop is... wait, there is no f***ing reason. We aren't talking about solar powered off the grid environments, and even then the monitor alone would blow the power budget...

 

[Cerb]

It's only Intel v. AMD because Intel is selling Celerons and Pentiums cheap enough that the makers don't want FM2(+) APUs for those machines (if they were cost effective, you can bet they would--TDP issues will be minor for a no-battery AIO). You can replace the E1 through A4 with the new Atom, and have basically the same conversation.

The Jaguar unit will do, but won't do well, and will not fare as well as it ages. There isn't value in such an AIO, merely big vendor penny-pinching.

 

[Bateluer]

I'm looking to get an all in one (due to limited desktop space) for my mom to use at work - is the AMD E1-2500 (1.4GHz) CPU going to cut it for Windows 8.1, strictly for office work? It'll be used for emails basically 90% of the time and occasional web surfing. Word/Excel won't be used much if at all.

Thanks!

PS. Rest of the specs: 4GB RAM, 500GB HD, integrated Radeon 8240 http://shopping.hp.com/en_US/home-of...C-ENERGY-STAR-

I didn't read the whole thread, but I'll reply based on my experiences with an A6 1450 APU in my Acer V5 122P. That A6 1450 would barely cut it for what you're describing, and the E1 is a slower part. The A6 struggles with Youtube 720p, struggles with multiple browser tabs, etc.

It'll be light and quiet, with low power use, to be sure, but I'd look for something with a little more performance if I was in your shoes. Perhaps they sell an AIO device with a Haswell i3 or Celeron base?