- Mar 22, 2013
- 138
- 0
- 71
First, let's see what PC manufacturers usually offer:
Atom with 2 GB RAM and 32 GB eMMC
Celeron with 2 GB RAM and 32 GB eMMC (most common: N3050)
Celeron with 4 GB RAM and 500 GB HDD
Pentium with 4 GB RAM and 500 GB HDD (common ones: N3540 and N3700)
(Celeron and Pentium example configurations from: http://www.dell.com/us/p/inspiron-11-3147-laptop/pd but other manufacturers' offerings are similar)
Let's say I dont' want to load a full HDD with data, just the OS, a few programs, and my data can go onto an SD card. For my use case - we are speaking about budget laptops - eMMC is better than HDD.
Atoms has 4 cores. Celerons and Pentiums have 2. Atoms cost around $25, Celerons $100, Pentiums $150.
Now the old adage with older notebook/desktop processors go (such as with Core 2 Duo, but I guess it's still the case with i3, i5 and i7) that for office and browsing, single core performance is what matters most. Multicore mattters if you do stuff like edit videos. Even on mobile, Apple's ARM A8, A9, etc chips are beating the competition in single core performance.
Brad Linder of Liliputing reviews such machines I'm in the market for (can be more than $200, in fact)
Brand new Acer Aspire One Cloudbook 11
http://liliputing.com/2015/10/acer-...ook-for-under-200-but-it-comes-at-a-cost.html
Is said to be sluggish, becuase of the low clocked 2 cores.
The year old ASUS EeeBook X205TA with an Atom Bay Trail-T Quad Core Z3735
http://liliputing.com/2015/01/asus-eeebook-x205-budget-windows-laptop-review.html
Is said to be much better, faster; single core speed is similar but it has 4 cores.
Both of the above machines compete in the 2 GB RAM, 32 GB eMMC category.
So, can we conclude that in the budget category, multicore performance is more important than single core? If so, why do manyfacturers use the more expensive and power hungry, but not necessarily faster Celeron and Atom processors? Such as the popular(?) HP Stream 11 as well. A mystery to me. Or, I may totally misunderstand something.
Not to mention battery life, the ASUS with Atom offers 12 hours, the Celeron $200 laptops 8 hours. The Ideapad 100s, which just came out, but uses the same year old Atom as the ASUS (why?), also offers a measly 8 hours; another mystery.
How about RAM? Does having 2 GB or 4 GB matter as much in this category and typical use cases as the CPU? None of the Atoms come with 4 GB onboard, though (except for the Microsoft Surface 3, non Pro, maxed out version only).
I can't wait to see Atom x5s and x7s in normal laptops as well, not only in tablets.
Atom with 2 GB RAM and 32 GB eMMC
Celeron with 2 GB RAM and 32 GB eMMC (most common: N3050)
Celeron with 4 GB RAM and 500 GB HDD
Pentium with 4 GB RAM and 500 GB HDD (common ones: N3540 and N3700)
(Celeron and Pentium example configurations from: http://www.dell.com/us/p/inspiron-11-3147-laptop/pd but other manufacturers' offerings are similar)
Let's say I dont' want to load a full HDD with data, just the OS, a few programs, and my data can go onto an SD card. For my use case - we are speaking about budget laptops - eMMC is better than HDD.
Atoms has 4 cores. Celerons and Pentiums have 2. Atoms cost around $25, Celerons $100, Pentiums $150.
Now the old adage with older notebook/desktop processors go (such as with Core 2 Duo, but I guess it's still the case with i3, i5 and i7) that for office and browsing, single core performance is what matters most. Multicore mattters if you do stuff like edit videos. Even on mobile, Apple's ARM A8, A9, etc chips are beating the competition in single core performance.
Brad Linder of Liliputing reviews such machines I'm in the market for (can be more than $200, in fact)
Brand new Acer Aspire One Cloudbook 11
http://liliputing.com/2015/10/acer-...ook-for-under-200-but-it-comes-at-a-cost.html
Is said to be sluggish, becuase of the low clocked 2 cores.
The year old ASUS EeeBook X205TA with an Atom Bay Trail-T Quad Core Z3735
http://liliputing.com/2015/01/asus-eeebook-x205-budget-windows-laptop-review.html
Is said to be much better, faster; single core speed is similar but it has 4 cores.
Both of the above machines compete in the 2 GB RAM, 32 GB eMMC category.
So, can we conclude that in the budget category, multicore performance is more important than single core? If so, why do manyfacturers use the more expensive and power hungry, but not necessarily faster Celeron and Atom processors? Such as the popular(?) HP Stream 11 as well. A mystery to me. Or, I may totally misunderstand something.
Not to mention battery life, the ASUS with Atom offers 12 hours, the Celeron $200 laptops 8 hours. The Ideapad 100s, which just came out, but uses the same year old Atom as the ASUS (why?), also offers a measly 8 hours; another mystery.
How about RAM? Does having 2 GB or 4 GB matter as much in this category and typical use cases as the CPU? None of the Atoms come with 4 GB onboard, though (except for the Microsoft Surface 3, non Pro, maxed out version only).
I can't wait to see Atom x5s and x7s in normal laptops as well, not only in tablets.
Last edited: