Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel atom

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 23, 2009 4:09:46 PM

hi there,
a friend of mine recently asked me is it worth to have an intel atom 1.6 dual core for hers daily works. is it gives same performance as pentium4 2.0 or less? thanx..

More about : intel atom

April 23, 2009 4:11:11 PM

well a single atom core is equal to a 2.4ghz pentium 4.
April 23, 2009 4:18:09 PM

Helloworld_98 said:
well a single atom core is equal to a 2.4ghz pentium 4.

thanx a lot..
Related resources
a b à CPUs
April 23, 2009 4:55:09 PM

Helloworld_98 said:
well a single atom core is equal to a 2.4ghz pentium 4.



Every post you make gets worse and worse. Where are you links to prove your claims? I really hope that you are around 10-12 years old. STOP!!!

Sorry for the rant but this guy has no clue...

On Topic: Here are a set of benchmarks on the Atom 330

http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/D945...
April 23, 2009 4:59:26 PM

BadTrip said:
Every post you make gets worse and worse. Where are you links to prove your claims? I really hope that you are around 10-12 years old. STOP!!!

Sorry for the rant but this guy has no clue...

On Topic: Here are a set of benchmarks on the Atom 330

http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/D945...


The benchmarks are good... but they don't prove or disprove that the Atom 330 is any faster or slower than an old P4 2.4ghz.
a b à CPUs
April 23, 2009 9:26:17 PM

It's quite a bit slower than a P4 2.4. I've used both, it can't compare.

I'd say it's more along the lines of a 1GHz PIII. Maybe a bit faster.
April 23, 2009 9:41:47 PM

I have benchmarked the following computer configurations using Wprime version 1.41 32M test.

P4 2.66Ghz 533FBS 512Kb Cache in a Intel 865/ICH5 based motherboard
P4 3.0Ghz 800FBS 1Mb Cache in the same model of motherboard as above
Celeron 420 1.6Ghz 800FSB 512Kb Cache in a intel 945/ICH7 based motherboard

In this test the computers had the following results (Less is better)

Celeron 420 1.6Ghz 110 seconds
P4 3.0Ghz 117 seconds
P4 2.66Ghz 141 Seconds

So a P4 2.4 would probably be around 150-155 seconds or about the same a the Celeron running at ~1.15-1.2 Ghz (all based on linear scaling with clock speed)

I know what you are thinking I asked about the Atom not a Celeron! But there are a number of benchmarks for Atom V Celeron on the web and this would give you some idea.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/intelatom-...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-Atom-Efficien...
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php

From these it would suggest that an Atom 330 would be faster than a P4 2.4Ghz.

Good luck.
April 24, 2009 12:07:34 AM

BadTrip said:
Every post you make gets worse and worse. Where are you links to prove your claims? I really hope that you are around 10-12 years old. STOP!!!

Sorry for the rant but this guy has no clue...

On Topic: Here are a set of benchmarks on the Atom 330

http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/D945...

What have you got against 10-12 year olds? I just passed that milestone...
a b à CPUs
April 24, 2009 12:15:29 AM

hollett said:
I have benchmarked the following computer configurations using Wprime version 1.41 32M test.

P4 2.66Ghz 533FBS 512Kb Cache in a Intel 865/ICH5 based motherboard
P4 3.0Ghz 800FBS 1Mb Cache in the same model of motherboard as above
Celeron 420 1.6Ghz 800FSB 512Kb Cache in a intel 945/ICH7 based motherboard

In this test the computers had the following results (Less is better)

Celeron 420 1.6Ghz 110 seconds
P4 3.0Ghz 117 seconds
P4 2.66Ghz 141 Seconds

So a P4 2.4 would probably be around 150-155 seconds or about the same a the Celeron running at ~1.15-1.2 Ghz (all based on linear scaling with clock speed)

I know what you are thinking I asked about the Atom not a Celeron! But there are a number of benchmarks for Atom V Celeron on the web and this would give you some idea.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/intelatom-...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-Atom-Efficien...
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php

From these it would suggest that an Atom 330 would be faster than a P4 2.4Ghz.

Good luck.


Keep in mind that an Atom 330 is a true dual core at 1.6GHz with hyperthreading (4 effective cores). That isn't the standard one - the single cored 1.6GHz Atom is quite a bit slower.
a c 179 à CPUs
a b å Intel
April 24, 2009 4:25:49 AM

First of all, no the Atom is slower.

Having said that, there are some very nice computers (nettops?) being released soon that are quiet and perform nicely for basic tasks.

My recommended Minimal specs for a snappy, low-powered desktop:
CPU: Atom330
RAM: 2GB (4GB recommended)
Graphics: NVidia 9400
OS: Vista x32 (Vista x64 or Windows 7 x64 recommended)
Hard drive: preferably a 3.5" drive of 95MB/sec or more average read rates. 2.5" are slower, and although slightly quieter not required in a desktop. 2.5" SSD are the future but currently too expensive)
eSATA connection: to hookup an external SATA hard drive if needed
other: media ports?

Most modern CPU's are rarely used (I'm currently at 8%). A single core Atom is getting a little low though. It's not just about the CPU. For general usage, enough RAM is often the best upgrade. Going from 1GB to 2GB is a huge boost.

Anyway, there's the general guidelines above.

Again, there should be a slew of computers coming out with low-powered CPU (many with only 1GB RAM and a single-core Atom). I can't recommend any of these as they aren't out yet.

Your friend might be best off simply buying a pre-built PC or building one. I really do think it worth the wait for some of the small computers coming out later on this year.
a c 179 à CPUs
a b å Intel
April 24, 2009 4:47:26 AM

Here's an example of a pretty nice Atom PC:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/17/asus-eeebox-pc-b208-...

It's not out yet.

Also note that many monitors and HDTV's are supporting the mounting of these so you can hide them out of site. The drawback is they don't have CD/DVD players/burners although you can get external USB burners.

Anyway, this was just an example. I also love the new Mac Mini which does have a DVD burner. Too expensive, but it's a great example of what I love in a low-powered, yet responsive non-gaming desktop PC. The new, basic Mac Mini's CPU blows the Atom out of the water, yet the PC's IDLE POWER is incredibly low (13Watts in idle).

I did see testing showing a stressed Atom system where the single-core Atom used only 2W of the total 45W. So err on the side of a better CPU, especially in a desktop.
April 24, 2009 5:46:20 PM

cjl said:
I'd say it's more along the lines of a 1GHz PIII. Maybe a bit faster.


Per-core, I'd say that's about right. But it's fine so long as you don't plan to play modern games or do video transcoding and the like.
April 24, 2009 9:01:38 PM

Actually, I remember now: I did benchmark my Atom 330 system a while back and it came out a bit faster than a Cray Y-MP. But I'm not sure that's a useful comparison for determining Windows performance :) .
April 25, 2009 2:47:33 AM

hollett said:
I have benchmarked the following computer configurations using Wprime version 1.41 32M test.

P4 2.66Ghz 533FBS 512Kb Cache in a Intel 865/ICH5 based motherboard
P4 3.0Ghz 800FBS 1Mb Cache in the same model of motherboard as above
Celeron 420 1.6Ghz 800FSB 512Kb Cache in a intel 945/ICH7 based motherboard

In this test the computers had the following results (Less is better)

Celeron 420 1.6Ghz 110 seconds
P4 3.0Ghz 117 seconds
P4 2.66Ghz 141 Seconds

So a P4 2.4 would probably be around 150-155 seconds or about the same a the Celeron running at ~1.15-1.2 Ghz (all based on linear scaling with clock speed)

I know what you are thinking I asked about the Atom not a Celeron! But there are a number of benchmarks for Atom V Celeron on the web and this would give you some idea.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/intelatom-...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-Atom-Efficien...
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php

From these it would suggest that an Atom 330 would be faster than a P4 2.4Ghz.

Good luck.


To use only 1 benchmark, and for it to be a synthetic one at that, is not a solid base on which to build your argument. There is already a very nice comparison of Celeron 4xx cpus to netburst architecture:
http://ixbtlabs.com/articles2/cpu/intel-celeron-420-440...

That link shows that on average, the Celeron 420 is more equivalent to a 2.8GHz HT enabled P4. On the other hand, several benchmark sites I've seen show a single core Atom to be the same as a 1.6GHz P4. Now, if we use the theory that adding a second core to a cpu architecture offers up a 50% performance increase as has been shown in multiple benchmarks ever since the Pentium D came out, the simple math says an atom 330 should be equivalent to a 2.4GHz pentium 4, non-hyperthreading model. That's best case scenario.
!