holy crap intel atoms are teh suck

[thepd7]

My 1.6a Northwood OC'd to 2.6GHz on OEM HS/F for 5 years straight. $200 processor with $800 performance, at the time.

P4's were the shit.

So you're saying that beats the quad core AMD I got for next to nothing?

 

[Ricemarine]

Yay for paying for the discontinued SU2300! Wooo!!!! 3X stronger and better than the atoms! and for $350 too last February .

Anyhow, on a side note the N450 although slow does all of my girlfriend's basic needs: chatting, web surfing, word processing, video viewing, etc etc.

 

[frostedflakes]

I wish Atom was just a hair faster. Currently it seems to be a bit too weak for flash heavy sites, if they were able to bump it up to 2.0GHz, somewhere in that area it would probably be perfect. That and no hardware H.264/VC-1 decoding acceleration in 2011 is just pathetic IMO, even for a lower end system (fortunately my Atom netbook has one of those Broadcom cards to handle HD video). But other than those gripes, I don't really have any major complaints with Atom. At home I'm obviously going to use my desktop whenever possible, but for portable web browsing my netbook is a pretty capable machine.

Those CULV netbooks are really nice, though. Wish I would have bought one back when they were so cheap.

 

[JimmiG]

I found the biggest problem with my first-gen Aspire One netbook was the *extremely* slow SSD. It was probably slower than even the cheapest USB memory sticks and SD cards. Surprised the HDD versions also feel so sluggish.. But yeah, in general, my 1 GHz phone feels much faster than the netbook ever did running TinyXP. Hence why I sold the netbook.

 

[Arkaign]

Atom is nearly unforgivably bad. Sure it's okay for a couple of basic apps at a time, but even running many web sites without flashblocking tweaks brings it to a sludge. It's just a processor that would have a hard time competing with desktop CPUs of what, 7 years ago or more? Sure the power efficiency is great, but honestly, how about something that's capable of at least twice the performance of current Atoms even if it uses twice the power while doing so?

As for tablets, I'm not even an apple guy, but my brother's iPad feels like it's going freaking 20 billion miles per second compared to any atom-based product I've ever seen, oh and the screen and battery life make netbooks look pathetic. I don't dig Safari and I think the Apple/Flash problems are retarded though.

 

[Dutchpotatoe]

I'm still using an Acer Aspire One from 2008 as my main machine. I installed Ubuntu 12.04 on it which makes it perfect for browsing, email, skype.

Watching a video on hulu however is very laggy, I get better results with one of the first pentium 4's that came out.

It was super slow with XP, I would never use it with vista, or windows 7, with ubuntu it's just fine for basic stuff. But it is true that the atom chip is a disaster...

You can get faster chips that use less power that are based on ARM technology. Like the ones in your cell phone, Ipad.

 

[HeXen]

I had one of the early Atoms in an MSI Netbook. I never thought it was that bad at all, i could even run my SNES/Nintendo emulators just fine too. Vids ran fine, browsing the web was fine.

 

[SAWYER]

*Dutchpotatoe casts master level 80 thread reserector spell*

 

[T_Yamamoto]

*Dutchpotatoe casts master level 80 thread reserector spell*

Lol at least its not like 5 years old

 

[BladeVenom]

*Dutchpotatoe casts master level 80 thread reserector spell*

 

[Dutchpotatoe]

Sorry, I was googling on intel atom sucks and: Intel atom are teh suck showed up ;-)

I enjoy getting the maximum out of this low end machine, gives me a little kick. But it's true that the atom, even when it came out was seriously out of date already.

then again, enjoying listening to some internet radio on radio tray right now and browsing the news without any problems.

 

[T_Yamamoto]

LOL. Nice art

 

[RelaxTheMind]

hypothetically speaking... if i ever got a netbook it would at least be an i3. somewhat similar power consumption but way faster.

 

[Crono]

hypothetically speaking... if i ever got a netbook it would at least be an i3. somewhat similar power consumption but way faster.

Netbooks are dead. No reason to get one with ultrabooks, tablets, and convertible Win 8 tablets with Ivy Bridge (and eventually Haswell) CPUs.

 

[lxskllr]

Netbooks are dead. No reason to get one with ultrabooks, tablets, and convertible Win 8 tablets with Ivy Bridge (and eventually Haswell) CPUs.

Netbooks are cheaper. They're "ultrabooks" without the inflated price.

 

[Crono]

Netbooks are cheaper. They're "ultrabooks" without the inflated price.

I'll give you that, but if you need a cheaper solution, just buy an older laptop.
If you need cheap, portable, and decent battery life, then yeah, netbooks still have some use.

 

[arrfep]

*Dutchpotatoe casts master level 80 thread reserector spell*

Give him a break. He's been trying to post since the thread was started but his netbook just now finally loaded the page.