Celeron J1900, can it play 1080P videos / twitch streams SMOOTHLY?

[VirtualLarry]

Not sure which sub-forum to ask this in.

I know my Asus N2830 laptops, had some issues with 1080P videos on YouTube, they would play smoothly for like 5 seconds, then stutter, then play smoothly, etc. CPU usage was low. Didn't seem like it was specifically a CPU problem, rather something with drivers and the OEM config.

Edit: J1900 is a quad-core Atom.

Edit: The reason for asking this is, Newegg has a complete refurb Win8.1 PC with 4GB / 500GB, and a J1900 CPU, for $130, until 6/3. I might be interested in getting one for a friend of mine, whose PC is getting kind of old by now. I would also upgrade the RAM from 4 to 8GB, and maybe throw in an SSD or Hybrid drive (Seagate SSHD). It would certainly save on his electric bill.

Edit: Thanks krumme. When I get some money (hopefully soon), I'll try to pick one up for him.

 

[krumme]

Yes

 

[crashtech]

As long as you don't mind ST performance that is in the basement with Core2 mobile chips from from 2008.

 

[VirtualLarry]

As long as you don't mind ST performance that is in the basement with Core2 mobile chips from from 2008.

Hmm, is it really that bad of a user experience? My Z3735F Atom quad-core in my HP Stream 7 isn't horrible. The 1GB of RAM seems like a bigger limitation than the CPU.

What about one of these?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856164024

Or should I get him a G3258 combo? He currently has an X4 640, on a mATX mobo (AM2+, DDR2), and thinks it's slow. (Yes, he has an SSD.)

 

[krumme]

J1900 is super cpu for those money. 4gb is fine dont waste money on more. I would say ssd is borderline but can surely be a nice benefit. I would just keep it as it is and keep it cheap. Upgrade to ssd if browsing is slow or office is slow.
The speed is comparable to quad 1.6ghz core 2. Thats just ok for office use imho.

 

[SPBHM]

software is critical for video streaming, IE seems to be the best for twitch (firefox the worst)
with video acceleration working it should handle the videos easily,

 

[crashtech]

I just think devs are used to figuring something a bit faster as their minimum requirement, so what might work today might be broken in a year. Maybe it's an overkill mindset on my part, yet I never get any complaints about performance. For what I am willing to deal with, G1840 or equivalent represents the bottom rung for desktop machines, and Sandy i5 for mobile.

 

[krumme]

J1900 plays mkv 23fps without stuttering like all sb and to a small degree ib. Even if its 7gen gpu its fixed here as hw is.

Add its a dirt cheap cpu/machine.

 

[crashtech]

Matter of fact, look what you can get for similar money, nearly twice the performance in a laptop. Atom desktops are pathetic, sorry:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-Thin...860?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4d32fc6a3c

 

[ShintaiDK]

You are buying junk again. At least get a Core based Celeron.

Atom is something you use in tablets, NAS etc. Not desktops or laptops.

 

[VirtualLarry]

You are buying junk again. At least get a Core based Celeron.

Atom is something you use in tablets, NAS etc. Not desktops or laptops.

First, this isn't for me, it's for someone that browses forums, and watches twitch streams all day, and occasionally pays bills or prints something.

Second, show me where I can get a complete Core-based Celeron quad-core with a Windows license for $130 USD. I'll happily buy it. Refurb is fine. I'm waiting.

 

[waltchan]

Not sure which sub-forum to ask this in.

I know my Asus N2830 laptops, had some issues with 1080P videos on YouTube, they would play smoothly for like 5 seconds, then stutter, then play smoothly, etc. CPU usage was low. Didn't seem like it was specifically a CPU problem, rather something with drivers and the OEM config.

Edit: J1900 is a quad-core Atom.

Edit: The reason for asking this is, Newegg has a complete refurb Win8.1 PC with 4GB / 500GB, and a J1900 CPU, for $130, until 6/3. I might be interested in getting one for a friend of mine, whose PC is getting kind of old by now. I would also upgrade the RAM from 4 to 8GB, and maybe throw in an SSD or Hybrid drive (Seagate SSHD). It would certainly save on his electric bill.

Edit: Thanks krumme. When I get some money (hopefully soon), I'll try to pick one up for him.

I see them all the time. All these refurb Acers were store-returned from Walmart because customers complain they are too slow for them (only 526 single-thread score). These Walmart customers used to own a AMD AM2 or AM3 processor that are a lot faster than the new Celeron J1900.

If you decide to get one, make sure you go into BIOS and change the video memory from 64MB to 128MB (strongly recommended). The 128MB shared video memory will help a lot, but drains quite a bit if you're using only 4GB RAM.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Matter of fact, look what you can get for similar money, nearly twice the performance in a laptop. Atom desktops are pathetic, sorry:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-Thin...860?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4d32fc6a3c

Twice the performance, for twice the price? Wow, that's nearly unheard of in the technology industry... oh, wait.

PS. Windows not included on that laptop.

 

[waltchan]

You are buying junk again. At least get a Core based Celerons.

The previous model of the Celeron J1900 is Celeron G470 LGA1155 Sandy Bridge, already discontinued and gone two years ago, but whole lot faster.

 

[ShintaiDK]

The previous model of the Celeron J1900 is Celeron G470 Sandy Bridge, already discontinued and gone two years ago.

There isnt any previous models to the J1900. A dualcore Haswell Celeron is 42$.

 

[ShintaiDK]

First, this isn't for me, it's for someone that browses forums, and watches twitch streams all day, and occasionally pays bills or prints something.

Second, show me where I can get a complete Core-based Celeron quad-core with a Windows license for $130 USD. I'll happily buy it. Refurb is fine. I'm waiting.

You funny enough get what you pay for. And a Core based doesnt need to be quadcore to be faster in everything and you know it. No wonder these Atom/Kabini desktops gets returned left and right.

 

[waltchan]

There isnt any previous models to the J1900. A dualcore Haswell Celeron is 42$.

In terms of marketing and not its technical, it is. Before Celeron J1800/J1900, OEM PC makers were using Celeron G465/G470 LGA1155 Sandy Bridge as the budget, cheapest PCs selling for less than $250 new. Then they were discontinued on January 2014 and replaced with Celeron J1800/J1900.

 

[VirtualLarry]

You funny enough get what you pay for. And a Core based doesnt need to be quadcore to be faster in everything and you know it. No wonder these Atom/Kabini desktops gets returned left and right.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2131&cmp[]=2267&cmp[]=171

Looking at the Passmark numbers, the J1900 is half the performance, in both ST and MT, than his current AMD X4 640 CPU. A G3258 is nearly double the ST performance, and unbelievably, is faster in MT by a good chunk, than even the quad-core X4 640. I didn't realize that Haswell IPC was THAT far ahead of an Athlon II generation. Either that, or the Passmark numbers are skewed, because people benchmark the G3258 OCed, and the benchmark doesn't prevent those numbers from being added in.

I've also been trying to push this friend into getting a G3258 combo (when one pops up again for $100 or less at Newegg), but he seemed a lot more interested in the complete refurb PC for $130.

You're right, though, ShintaiDK, you do get what you pay for.

OTOH, in terms of his electric bill, and the power-consumption of his PC - the J1900 is 10W, the G3258 is 53W, and the X4 640 is 95W. Maybe in the longer-term view, assuming that it doesn't become "too slow" for his tasks, then the J1900 might not be the worst choice of the bunch.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Noooo! Dooooooon't dooooooo iiiiiiit!

 

[waltchan]

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2131&cmp[]=2267&cmp[]=171

Looking at the Passmark numbers, the J1900 is half the performance, in both ST and MT, than his current AMD X4 640 CPU. A G3258 is nearly double the ST performance, and unbelievably, is faster in MT by a good chunk, than even the quad-core X4 640. I didn't realize that Haswell IPC was THAT far ahead of an Athlon II generation. Either that, or the Passmark numbers are skewed, because people benchmark the G3258 OCed, and the benchmark doesn't prevent those numbers from being added in.

I've also been trying to push this friend into getting a G3258 combo (when one pops up again for $100 or less at Newegg), but he seemed a lot more interested in the complete refurb PC for $130.

You're right, though, ShintaiDK, you do get what you pay for.

OTOH, in terms of his electric bill, and the power-consumption of his PC - the J1900 is 10W, the G3258 is 53W, and the X4 640 is 95W. Maybe in the longer-term view, assuming that it doesn't become "too slow" for his tasks, then the J1900 might not be the worst choice of the bunch.

Exactly, there's always a catch in why these refurb J1900 Acers are so cheap. People are continuously returning them back to Walmart constantly in high-number because it's too slow for them, and Acer has a hard time selling these refurbs to people, so they continue to drop the price as supply exceeds demand right now.

Had the processor been a Celeron G470 in the first place, there will be 70% less amount in returns than what it's now, and refurb prices wouldn't go below $200. Acer lost a lot of money gambling the J1900, but it's not Acer's fault, they blame Intel instead, as Intel discontinued that G470 processor on January 2014. Intel just got too greedy. The G470 should NOT have been discontinued yet, and I was against it at that time, actually.

 

[ShintaiDK]

It doesnt matter if the J1900 is 10W if it needs more power to execute tasks. Its a classic misconception. Not to mention the bad user experience.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Exactly, there's always a catch in why these refurb J1900 Acers are so cheap. People are continuously returning them back to Walmart constantly in high-number because it's too slow for them, and Acer has a hard time selling these refurbs to people, so they continue to drop the price as supply exceeds demand right now.

Had the processor been a Celeron G470 in the first place, there will be 70% less amount in returns than what it's now, and refurb prices wouldn't go below $200. Acer lost a lot of money gambling the J1900, but it's not Acer's fault, they blame Intel instead, as Intel discontinued that G470 processor on January 2014. Intel just got too greedy. The G470 should NOT have been discontinued yet, and I was against it at that time, actually.

While I don't doubt you, and Intel certainly IS a "greedy corporation"... I do wonder one thing. Why are the top selling laptops on Amazon all Bay Trail-based? If they are bad for desktop, why are they selling well for laptops? Or is it all about the power consumption, and battery life is better with Bay Trail, compared to Core?

(I get phenomenally good battery life with my 1007U and a six-cell battery on this Acer.)

 

[waltchan]

While I don't doubt you, and Intel certainly IS a "greedy corporation"... I do wonder one thing. Why are the top selling laptops on Amazon all Bay Trail-based? If they are bad for desktop, why are they selling well for laptops? Or is it all about the power consumption, and battery life is better with Bay Trail, compared to Core?

(I get phenomenally good battery life with my 1007U and a six-cell battery on this Acer.)

Believe it or not, it's actually price the #1 most-motivating selling point here, then power consumption and battery life next. Intel released Bay Trail only to cut production cost by up to 80%, and they want PC makers to lower the starting laptop price to $199.99. PC makers realize they're making more profit on Bay Trail than before, so they produce more and continue to push prices down.

When you lower the price of laptops, more buyers rush in and buy them fast. Sales number improved by over 50% for the cheap laptops compare to Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge Celeron before.

You said you own a 1007U, which is a Celeron Sandy Bridge. Great, I have an Asus 15.6" laptop with 1007U as well, which was Asus's last and final Celeron "notebook" processor quality. The Bay Trails are all "tablet" processor quality capable in powering up notebook and big-o desktop computers.

 

[waltchan]

Oh, my bad, actually 1007U is Ivy Bridge Celeron.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

While I don't doubt you, and Intel certainly IS a "greedy corporation"... I do wonder one thing. Why are the top selling laptops on Amazon all Bay Trail-based? If they are bad for desktop, why are they selling well for laptops? Or is it all about the power consumption, and battery life is better with Bay Trail, compared to Core?

(I get phenomenally good battery life with my 1007U and a six-cell battery on this Acer.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll3uipTO-4A

Low cost trumps all for people who don't know what they're getting themselves into. Or they figure they can "get away" with something. Or they don't know how awful it is because they don't have a frame of reference for good. (Like people who haven't used SSDs before.)