Why are low cost windows notebooks so terrible?

[BD2003]

I thought windows 8 with bing was supposed to be free for IHVs?

About a year ago, I bought an Acer C720 chromebook for $249 with a 1.4ghz dual core haswell, 4GB of ram and a 16gb upgradeable msata SSD. But I genuinely need windows now, and I dont need a performance monster.

So I bought an HP stream 13. $20 bucks less, but it comes packed with a dual core 2ghz+ bay trail (ahem, atom), 2GB of ram and the slowest 32gb eMMC you can imagine. I swear to you this is the slowest notebook I've ever used. Open more than 2-3 tabs in chrome and it grinds to a halt. It is in a constant state of memory starvation, and even at it's best pages load noticeably slower than on the chromebook and scrolling is a stuttery mess.

The chromebook is still smooth and responsive. Runs like a dream, but it just can't run windows. I guess what I'm asking is, what's the deal here? If windows 8.1 with bing is free, why are all these low end windows notebooks coming with significantly worse hardware than a year old chromebook for the same price? Do they really think a modern browser runs acceptably with 2GB of ram and crappy emmc? It'd at least be salvageable if it was upgrade-able.

Just for shits and giggles, I tried to put the Win 10 technical preview on it...and you literally can't install it. The windows 8 recovery partition sucks up so much space that you literally can not upgrade it.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Well, that Atom is slower than the Chromebook's CPU, by a fair margin, and the OS it's running is heftier. So there's that - if you installed Windows on the Acer, it probably would be a similar experience though.

Which brings me to the answer to the question: crap mobile (non-big-core) chips and slow storage.

2GB of RAM and a slowish 32GB SSD is adequate for a lot of things, but if you're comparing it to higher-end machines like the average computer gaming enthusiast nerd uses, your low end machines will tend to come up short. The HTPC in my workout room is a Celeron 847, 32GB SSD, and 2GB RAM, and it's fine for Hulu/Netflix/PLEX and opening 1-2 firefox tabs, but it definitely starts to churn if you ask too much of it.

I think part of the problem is the web content. Everybody thinks it's lightweight because it's been around a while, but it's constantly evolving - you throw enough Flash- and Javascript-heavy clickbait at it, and even an i7 with 16GB of RAM will chug.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

They also have crap screens, crap keyboards, and crap trackpads, but that's kind of beside the point.

 

[alkemyst]

/because low cost.

 

[BD2003]

Well, that Atom is slower than the Chromebook's CPU, by a fair margin, and the OS it's running is heftier. So there's that - if you installed Windows on the Acer, it probably would be a similar experience though.

Which brings me to the answer to the question: crap mobile (non-big-core) chips and slow storage.

2GB of RAM and a slowish 32GB SSD is adequate for a lot of things, but if you're comparing it to higher-end machines like the average computer gaming enthusiast nerd uses, your low end machines will tend to come up short. The HTPC in my workout room is a Celeron 847, 32GB SSD, and 2GB RAM, and it's fine for Hulu/Netflix/PLEX and opening 1-2 firefox tabs, but it definitely starts to churn if you ask too much of it.

I think part of the problem is the web content. Everybody thinks it's lightweight because it's been around a while, but it's constantly evolving - you throw enough Flash- and Javascript-heavy clickbait at it, and even an i7 with 16GB of RAM will chug.

I'm comparing it to the chromebook, not my X99 desktop. I'm being realistic. I'm not asking why atom, 2GB of ram and 32gb of emmc is going to be slower than haswell, 4GB and mSATA, but why can't I buy a similarly equipped windows laptop as a year old chromebook if the cost of the OS isn't a factor? I'd love nothing more than to install windows on my chromebook, or even just to buy the exact same laptop with windows installed....but you can't.

The market is just so bizarre right now. There's cheap but upgradeable 15.6" windows laptops under $300, there's small 11-13" somewhat upgradeable chromebooks with reasonably good hardware under $300....but there's no small, somewhat upgradeable windows laptops under $300, it's all atom/emmc garbage. It doesn't make sense!

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Cost of OS is a factor. That windows license costs approximately this many monies.

http://www.microsoft.com/oem/en/licensing/sblicensing/Pages/index.aspx#fbid=SZaZrDDTZOi

 

[BD2003]

...are you actually reading my posts?

 

[fralexandr]

... as has been stated before:
a copy of windows costs ~$100, therefore you're comparing ~$250 of hardware to ~$130 of hardware

The baytrail atom is A LOT SLOWER than ANY haswell processor.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7314/intel-baytrail-preview-intel-atom-z3770-tested/2
2gb << 4gb ram

it's like comparing performance between a cheapo tablet (atom/baytrail) to a cheapo computer (haswell).

building a cheap haswell platform tends to be expensive (relative to baytrail/etc). making things smaller tends to be expensive. It's like asking why does a smartphone cost $600+ off contract if it's slower than a chromebook (haswell).

 

[BD2003]

"Windows 8.1 with bing" is free to system builders. The cost of the OS is not a factor.

 

[VirtualLarry]

"Windows 8.1 with bing" is free to system builders. The cost of the OS is not a factor.

Only for devices with screens smaller than nine inches. (That's what she said!)

 

[BD2003]

Only for devices with screens smaller than nine inches. (That's what she said!)

Then why would a device with a 13 inch screen use it instead of "normal" windows 8.1?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

"Windows 8.1 with bing" is free to system builders. The cost of the OS is not a factor.

Just because the system builder didn't pay for the license doesn't mean you're not. Given the choice between two identical laptops, most people would spend a few extra bucks on the one that can run Windows. Companies know this.

The Windows version of your Chromebook is around $300, and they hold their value quite a bit better than Chromebooks because Windows.

Also, Intel is probably pushing Atom-derived Celerons to their partners because margins are higher.

Looking at ark.intel.com, it looks like the new Atom-derived Celerons have tray pricing in the $100+ range, while the 1007U was $75 and older Atoms were ~$40. Dunno what kind of sweet deals the OEMs are getting, but if the CPU is a big chunk (25-50%) of the system cost and Intel jacks their prices up, that's game over, man.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Then why would a device with a 13 inch screen use it instead of "normal" windows 8.1?

It's probably still cheaper. For the OEM. For you? No.

To quote Goodfellas, "[expletive] you, pay me."

 

[BD2003]

Just because the system builder didn't pay for the license doesn't mean you're not. Given the choice between two identical laptops, most people would spend a few extra bucks on the one that can run Windows. Companies know this.

The Windows version of your Chromebook is around $300, and they hold their value quite a bit better than Chromebooks because Windows.

Also, Intel is probably pushing Atom-derived Celerons to their partners because margins are higher.

Looking at ark.intel.com, it looks like the new Atom-derived Celerons have tray pricing in the $100+ range, while the 1007U was $75 and older Atoms were ~$40. Dunno what kind of sweet deals the OEMs are getting, but if the CPU is a big chunk (25-50%) of the system cost and Intel jacks their prices up, that's game over, man.

What's the windows version? I've tried to find it and I can't.

 

[fire400]

not a big fan of atoms. the newer celerons and pentiums are pretty much older i3's.

some of the low cost w8.1 laptops are actually quite fast... just gotta look in the right places.

these are freshly, NEW-IN-BOX, not refurbs.

walmart: $200 HP very thin laptop with DVDRW, 4GB, 5400rpm, new celeron ; w8.1

microcenter: $200 Asus, very thin laptop, 4GB, 5400rpm, new pentium ; w8.1

also, @ microcenter $230, new quad pentium chip laptop, 4GB, 5400rpm ; w8.1

the current OS on these laptops can be configured to strip out 3rd party software on the current 5400rpm drives, and perform exceptionally well in the reconfigured OS environment.

64GB SATA for $40 on ebay, disable bios features, just clone win8.1 partitions, done. want your own win8.1 pro OS?, $35 paypal on 3rd party websites.

the battery life on some of these laptops can easily go 3hrs -5hrs+

also if you're looking in the right places, t410s i5 128GB SSD 4GB intel/nVidia x900p display laptops for ~$200. swap out any part of the laptop for super cheap; battery, keyboard, optical. may come with 1.8" drive configuration (or use ultra-bay), but current replacements of 64GB-128GB now can be had for easily less than $70, and dropping fast.

 

[Bateluer]

Short answer: The combination of a resource heavy OS, a slow CPU, a mechanical HDD, and a small amount of RAM.

 

[gmaster456]

A bit above your price range but won't be a complete dog.

http://www.dell.com/us/p/inspiron-11-3147-laptop/pd?oc=fndor1203hc&model_id=inspiron-11-3147-laptop.


These $200 Atom based Windows 8 laptops are like the netbooks of 5 years ago. Cheap disposable MS Office machines and starbucks computers. Something a college student can buy and still be able to afford Ramen Noodles, textbooks and condoms. They come with the anemic storage because microsoft is pushing them with 1TB of onedrive storage which for the intended market is more than enough. The average user isn't going to bother installing tech previews or anything more than Windows updates.

The laptop I linked would be more adequate for your usage.

 

[BD2003]

not a big fan of atoms. the newer celerons and pentiums are pretty much older i3's.

some of the low cost w8.1 laptops are actually quite fast... just gotta look in the right places.

these are freshly, NEW-IN-BOX, not refurbs.

walmart: $200 HP very thin laptop with DVDRW, 4GB, 5400rpm, new celeron ; w8.1

microcenter: $200 Asus, very thin laptop, 4GB, 5400rpm, new pentium ; w8.1

also, @ microcenter $230, new quad pentium chip laptop, 4GB, 5400rpm ; w8.1

the current OS on these laptops can be configured to strip out 3rd party software on the current 5400rpm drives, and perform exceptionally well in the reconfigured OS environment.

64GB SATA for $40 on ebay, disable bios features, just clone win8.1 partitions, done. want your own win8.1 pro OS?, $35 paypal on 3rd party websites.

the battery life on some of these laptops can easily go 3hrs -5hrs+

also if you're looking in the right places, t410s i5 128GB SSD 4GB intel/nVidia x900p display laptops for ~$200. swap out any part of the laptop for super cheap; battery, keyboard, optical. may come with 1.8" drive configuration (or use ultra-bay), but current replacements of 64GB-128GB now can be had for easily less than $70, and dropping fast.

I can't find anything like you're describing.

 

[386DX]

The problem is Chrome, it's gotten bloated on the Windows platform cause Google has been forcing Chrome OS into the Chrome browser. I'll guarantee you that if you use the internet explorer or Firefox you won't have issues with 2-3 tabs.

 

[fire400]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-Thin...29236906?pt=Laptops_Nov05&hash=item5414fad9aa

this thing is 250 shipped.

Lenovo ThinkPad T410s 14.1&#8243; Core i5 520M 2.4GHz 4GB 128GB SSD DVD±RW NVIDIA Optimus Video Windows 7 Pro 64-Bit Laptop; has 80% battery life

win7, i5, 4gb, SSD, nVidia discreet, power adapter

not sure what's better than this if you're looking for lag-less performance.

if the SSD is an older samsung without auto-trim, forget about hack-flashing of the SSD :
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2401492&highlight=samsung+ssd+trim

also, found a toshiba 1.8" SSD 128GB for $50 shipped, just in case the drive fails and needs to be replaced on the fly. or get a caddy and have a win7/winXP installation ready for dualboot.

the t420s has usb 3.0, future-mSATA, 2.5" SATA SSD installed, intel graphics, for less than a hundred dollars more:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-Thin...84605289?pt=Laptops_Nov05&hash=item20f123bf69

 

[BD2003]

That thing is gigantic compared to the chromebook or the stream.

 

[fire400]

just put a "pro performance" ssd in any of those low end notebooks and it solves the problem.

i put a samsung 840 evo into an Asus x200 with only 2GB RAM, and it's only got a dual-core celeron in it. thing flies faster than a lot of $500 notebooks.

 

[alkemyst]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-Thin...29236906?pt=Laptops_Nov05&hash=item5414fad9aa

this thing is 250 shipped.

Lenovo ThinkPad T410s 14.1&#8243; Core i5 520M 2.4GHz 4GB 128GB SSD DVD±RW NVIDIA Optimus Video Windows 7 Pro 64-Bit Laptop; has 80% battery life

win7, i5, 4gb, SSD, nVidia discreet, power adapter

not sure what's better than this if you're looking for lag-less performance.

if the SSD is an older samsung without auto-trim, forget about hack-flashing of the SSD :
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2401492&highlight=samsung+ssd+trim

also, found a toshiba 1.8" SSD 128GB for $50 shipped, just in case the drive fails and needs to be replaced on the fly. or get a caddy and have a win7/winXP installation ready for dualboot.

the t420s has usb 3.0, future-mSATA, 2.5" SATA SSD installed, intel graphics, for less than a hundred dollars more:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-Thin...84605289?pt=Laptops_Nov05&hash=item20f123bf69

The plastic is cracked on that one. The palm rest assembly is not that hard or expensive to replace though.

 

[ninaholic37]

I agree with everything dave_the_nerd and 386DX said also.

And the Acer C720 is definitely not the norm for that price range but the exception (in my opinion), almost all other Chromebooks that are $200-260 either use ARM or are now moving to Atom too (Acer included), and netbooks in that price range have always sacrificed things for the glory of margins.

 

[BD2003]

I agree with everything dave_the_nerd and 386DX said also.

And the Acer C720 is definitely not the norm for that price range but the exception (in my opinion), almost all other Chromebooks that are $200-260 either use ARM or are now moving to Atom too (Acer included), and netbooks in that price range have always sacrificed things for the glory of margins.

I guess my perspective is just skewed if the c720 was some sort of loss leader, it looks like the chromebook model with the 4GB ram and 32gb SSD sells for significantly more now.

Seriously though, it's too bad there's no proper windows drivers for it, it's a great machine. Honestly if there was a proper RDP client I'd prob just use that.