Athlon Neo X2 vs Intel Atom

[jvroig]

I'm interested in getting a 12" laptop. MSI has a very cheap one that uses the Athlon Neo X2, and it got me interested in it,

The netbook I aim to replace is an MSI Wind U100 (10" screen @ 1024x600, Intel Atom 1.6Ghz). I am generally happy with the specs (2GB RAM, 160GB HD, etc), but I wish to move up a little to get a bigger screen and a faster processor.

So far the MSI Wind U210x (the one that uses the Athlon Neo X2) takes care of the screen concern, being 12" @ 1366x768. Good enough upgrade for me in terms of the screen.

What I'm after now is the performance its CPU offers. How much faster generally would an Athlon Neo X2 be against the run-of-the-mill-netbook-Atom? (yes, I'm specifically asking about the dual-core Neo; I am not sure if it also has a single-core offering, but I'd rather make the point clear that yes I am definitely comparing a dual core Neo to a single core Atom)

Thanks in advance.

 

[richierich1212]

Well what programs do you plan on running? Even if the Atom is a little bit faster for single-threaded apps @ 1.6GHz, the Neo is dual-core so it should be a no brainer for you. And the mobile AMD processors usually have a better integrated gpu as well.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

The atom and neo basically don't compete with each other. Think of the neo as athlon X2 equivalent of the ultra low voltage core 2 duos. The neo X2 MV40 runs at 1.6 ghz and has a TDP of 15 watts (including chipset as far as i know). This should slot it a bit below an athlox X2 3800+ (perhaps on apr with the oem only 3600+). This is several orders of magnitude faster than the atom, however the atom has a tdp of like 2.5 watts (~12 with motherboard). The atom will be much slower, but get better battery life.

 

[jvroig]

Even if the Atom is a little bit faster for single-threaded apps @ 1.6GHz

Is it? I have no idea about their performance.

the Neo is dual-core so it should be a no brainer for you

I'm sorry, I was not clear in my initial post. I'm actually looking for something that should outperform the Atom significantly, perhaps 3-4x. If the Athlon Neo X2 can't do that, then I will look for something else.

Well what programs do you plan on running?

As a software developer, my work and my R&D interests end up with me using text editors and IDEs (eclipse), gcc, python, php, and also database tasks on MySQL. I also use GIMP on occasion, both for personal and work-related uses. I've been using my current MSI Wind for several months (it's very portable, so despite being only as powerful, cpu-wise, as my 4-year-old HP pavilion, it has become my de-facto laptop, so to speak), and normally it is just peachy, but I have given up on using it as my standard laptop because it recently slowed me down on some of my tasks, particularly on database reports that were a little complex. It took 45 seconds to generate the report in PHP with data from MySQL, including having PHP generate colorful bar graphs and pie charts for the data. On my home PC (Athlon X2 5000+), it takes 8 seconds. 45 seconds is too much, but I need a laptop because I have a very mobile lifestyle thanks to being a consultant, so I can't avoid working on one. That's why I want a small/light laptop, and also one that would be significantly more powerful than an atom.

Thanks.

 

[jvroig]

This is several orders of magnitude faster than the atom, however the atom has a tdp of like 2.5 watts (~12 with motherboard). The atom will be much slower, but get better battery life.

Thanks! If this is true (and I hope it is, because that's what I wanted to hear) then the Athlon Neo X2 laptop is a winner for me. I don't mind the battery life. My current Atom-powered 10" MSI Wind gets me 3.5 hours in Linux / 4.5 hours in Windows (6-cell). This Athlon Neo X2-powered laptop is also estimated to give 4 hours battery life, which means that's probably just 3 hours after I install Linux on it (6-cell also) but there's an upgrade available to a 9-cell battery, which will probably boost my Linux battery life to a little beyond 4 hours at least, making this one last even longer than my current atom-powered netbook.

 

[richierich1212]

I just did some research on the AMD Neo MV-40 and it looks like it's only a single-core processor. http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K8/AMD-Athlon%20Neo%20for%20Ultrathin%20Notebooks%20MV-40%20-%20AMGMV40OAX4DX.html

Have you checked out the Acer 1410 11.6" netbook with Intel SU2300 processor (Dual-core)? It looks like a very good netbook with great specs at a good price (Don't forget bing cashback):
http://cgi.ebay.com/Acer-AS1410-11-...iewItemQQptZLaptops_Nov05?hash=item439b87f645

 

[jvroig]

I just did some research on the AMD Neo MV-40 and it looks like it's only a single-core processor.

Ah, so there is a single-core version after all. However, there really is a dual-core X2 version:
Athlon Neo X2. I made a small error on the model, it's actually the MSI Wind U210x, not the plain U210. Evidently, that small "x" makes a whole lot of difference since it has the Neo X2 instead of the single-core Neo MV-40. Here is a similar MSI netbook also sporting a Neo X2: Engadget Link

Thanks for the Acer link. It does look great. I'll see if I can get one cheaper than the U210x.

 

[Fox5]

Perhaps consider the HP dm3z as well?
Also, though HP no longer carries it, you may be able to find a good deal on a dv2. HP may have some refurbished ones, or you can check ebay.

 

[jvroig]

Perhaps consider the HP dm3z as well? Also, though HP no longer carries it, you may be able to find a good deal on a dv2. HP may have some refurbished ones, or you can check ebay.

Thanks, will try to check that as well.

How about the Neo X2 vs Atom performance? Can anybody confirm how big the gap is between the two? Benchmarks, perhaps?

Thanks.

 

[hans007]

the neo X2 is a dual core athlon 64 1.5 ghz. in single threaded apps its probalby twice as fast as a 1.6 atom.

easily. and in multithreaded even more. not to mention the u210 has a radeon x1250 so its got much faster graphics.

if i were you though i'd wait a little bit for the u230 which has a 780g chipset which is even faster. the same cpu + chipset combo will be in the thinkpad x100e also. a single core neo even would be much faster than an atom. gateway had a 1.2 ghz single core neo for a while and on benchmarks it was 30-40% faster than a 1.6 atom.

 

[jvroig]

Thanks, hans007. Will certainly wait for more options to arrive, perhaps after the Christmas season.

single core neo even would be much faster than an atom. gateway had a 1.2 ghz single core neo for a while and on benchmarks it was 30-40% faster than a 1.6 atom.

Interesting:
- if 1.2Ghz Neo is already 30-40% faster than a 1.6 atom
- that means a 1.6Ghz Neo could very well be 50% faster or more than a 1.6 atom
- then a dual core 1.6Ghz Neo could very well run circles against the standard netbook Atom.

Can anybody point to benchmarks for the Athlon Neo or Athlon Neo X2?

 

[myocardia]

How about the Neo X2 vs Atom performance? Can anybody confirm how big the gap is between the two?

The 1.6Ghz Neo is supposed to be ~50% faster in single-threaded apps, so the X2 version would be ~3 times as fast in dual-threaded apps.

Benchmarks, perhaps?

Yeah, because netbook CPU benchmarks are all the rage at computer hardware review sites, right?

 

[jvroig]

Yeah, because netbook CPU benchmarks are all the rage at computer hardware review sites, right?

Not likely, but there must be a few out there, especially since comparing the ubiquitous Atom-powered netbooks to netbooks sporting an Atom competitor would be interesting for some.

 

[21stHermit]

This is several orders of magnitude faster than the atom, however the atom has a tdp of like 2.5 watts (~12 with motherboard). The atom will be much slower, but get better battery life.

Well I doubt that, since several orders of magnitude is 1000 times faster or more, we're talking super computer here. If you meant to say several times faster, I could buy that.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

OK ok, exaggeration, but still nowhere near each other.
The neo X2 MV40 runs at 1.6 Ghz.
Use a little extrapolation here in your head.
http://www.driverheaven.net/photoshop_results.php?page=results&min=150
You can see an X2 3600 (clocked at 2.0Ghz) taking 559.6 seconds on a complex photoshop benchmark.
Compare that to the 833.1 seconds it took an atom powered system to complete the test.
Certainly not the most definitive way to demonstrate the difference here, but certainly effective.
If you would really like me to go into more detail here, I can runs tests on my media center machine (3800+) versus my atom powered netbook in something consistent like matlab but I'll promise you, it won't be ANYWHERE close.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

Even better....

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=79&p2=38

Granted this is an X2 clocked at 2.1Ghz, it should display the difference quite clearly

 

[jvroig]

Even better.... http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=79&p2=38 Granted this is an X2 clocked at 2.1Ghz, it should display the difference quite clearly

Thanks. So the Athlon Neo is really the same as the Athlon 64, clock for clock? And the Athlon Neo X2 is likewise the same as the Athlon 64 X2 clock for clock?http://forums.anandtech.com/%5C

 

[IntelUser2000]

Thanks. So the Athlon Neo is really the same as the Athlon 64, clock for clock? And the Athlon Neo X2 is likewise the same as the Athlon 64 X2 clock for clock?http://forums.anandtech.com/\

As compared to 512KB L2 cache based Athlon 64/X2 yea. It might be very comparable to the initial single channel supporting Athlon 64's with only 512KB cache(Newcastle?). Which is still better than 2MB cache Dothan. The Atom 1.6GHz are comparable to a 1.0GHz, 512KB cache Dothan.

 

[Fox5]

As compared to 512KB L2 cache based Athlon 64/X2 yea. It might be very comparable to the initial single channel supporting Athlon 64's with only 512KB cache(Newcastle?). Which is still better than 2MB cache Dothan. The Atom 1.6GHz are comparable to a 1.0GHz, 512KB cache Dothan.

Dothan's only weakness was its very weak FPU. Even Atom turns out stronger performance, and the athlon 64 was in a whole other world.

 

[jvroig]

If the Athlon Neo is the same clock for clock as the Athlon 64, then wouldn't that mean it's going to be less powerful, significantly, than the ULV offerings of Intel since those are based on Core 2?

 

[nismotigerwvu]

If the Athlon Neo is the same clock for clock as the Athlon 64, then wouldn't that mean it's going to be less powerful, significantly, than the ULV offerings of Intel since those are based on Core 2?

Clock for clock, yes the C2D's will stomp them. As far as power consumption, it really is hard to tell. As these are both binned ultra low voltage chips we can't just continue with the same assumptions form the desktop variants. TDP is an ok starting point, but we know how murky that can be.

 

[jvroig]

TDP is an ok starting point, but we know how murky that can be.

Given the difference between the way AMD and Intel use "TDP", I agree.

Clock for clock, yes the C2D's will stomp them

Now that I think about it, no ULV is in a netbook for now, so as far as "netbooks" go, the Athlon Neo X2 is the winner. Of course, this opens up the whole "netbook vs notebook" debate, but I'm not interested in it. As long as I see a netbook-like laptop that is netbook-priced as well (meaning, small, light, and light on the wallet as well), then I'm all for it, whether they call it a netbook, ultramobile, thin-n-light, or whatever.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Dothan's only weakness was its very weak FPU. Even Atom turns out stronger performance, and the athlon 64 was in a whole other world.

The real question is how much that FPU difference matter in Netbooks. In multimedia, floating point is used, but for the rest of the applications, integer rules completely. The architectural features that help the CPU mainly for integer, helps FP too.

Still, performance wise Athlon 64s are overall better than Pentium M. The integrated memory controller and the modified architecture helps a lot.

Given the difference between the way AMD and Intel use "TDP", I agree.

They can argue whatever they want, but its roughly the same.

 

[Soulkeeper]

Got a link to the MSI X2 neo laptop ?
i'm wondering what graphics it has

 

[jvroig]

Specs posted are:

AMD Yukon Mobile Technology
AMD Athlon™ Neo X2 Dual-Core L335 1.6GHz,
12.1" 1366 x 768 HD-ready
2GB DDR2 Memory
250GB HDD
ATI RADEON X1270
1.3 MP Webcam
HDMI
D-Sub
3 x USB 2.0