Thinking about getting a netbox for the main room. Just going to be used for surfing the web and playing MP3's. Which one will be the better system to go with? A 3.06 P4 with Hyperthreading with 1GB of Memory or an Atom 330 setup that is a dual core with 4 HT's and 4 gigs of ram?
I have to believe the ATOM will do you better. Newer processors have more instructions per clock (2 on the ATOM vs 1.5 on the P4). It is also Dual Core so a 1.5Ghz Atom should (in theory) run about the same as a 3.75GHz P4.
More importantly in this case is the RAM. 1GB vs 4GB? You will notice more of a slowdown from having only 1GB than you will with any processor.
You should be fine with either though. I have an old P3 from work with 512KB RAM and after a fresh install of XP it runs just fine.
Edit: Oh yea, the ATOM will use much less power and produce less heat saving you some money on energy costs; if you care.
Message edited by chjade84 on 05-07-2009 at 05:19:59 PM
I'd go with the atom over the P4. The P4 will use MUCH more power than the atom. Or honestly the low wattage AMD's perform better than the Atom's do. I'd highly suggest looking at these. Are you looking at getting a small case as well?
The P4 will almost definitely be faster, but the Atom should be more than sufficient. Also, much of the speed deficit will be made up for by the much larger amount of memory that the Atom system would have. Besides, the power usage and heat will be quite a bit less with the Atom, so there's really no reason not to go for the Atom.
------------------------------Asus P6T deluxe
i7 965 @ 4.2GHz (200*21), 1.384V
12GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 CAS 7
Reply to cjl
I would go with the Atom without a doubt, it uses less power and produces less heat=less noise from fans, although I still run a second system with p4 3.0ghz @ 3.7ghz and it flies to be fair for what it is, but runs so damn hot and loud (Zalman Flower Cooler) that i would never use it as a netbox.
Besides, you could use a sempron or celeron for the netbox as browsing the net and listening to music is not taxing on any pc since the pIII days.
If you already have the P4 system (or any old system really) use it and don't waste your cash.
Even an old PIII rig would be more than powerful enough to surf the net and play MP3's.
If you are looking at buying and both options are similarly priced, go for the Atom option.
It may not be faster than the P4 but it is still plenty fast enough for what you need it to do.
As an added bonus, it will draw far less power than a P4 rig and, as a result, can be ran nearly silently.
------------------------------If the automobile had followed the same development cycle as the computer, a Rolls-Royce today would cost $100, get a million miles to the gallon, and explode once a year, killing everyone inside.
PSA
Reply to outlw6669
The most demanding app while surfing on the net are flash animations or everything flash related like youtube because it relies solely on cpu raw power, so everything above a pentium III 800 will be enough for net and mp3. I have a pentium III tualatin at 1.32ghz on a old bx440 board from 1999 (with a special adapter from slot1 to sk370), and it flies with everything i throw at it, internet based! Ok, only youtube HD sucks on it.
Message edited by rickzor on 05-08-2009 at 03:15:27 PM
Thinking about getting a netbox for the main room. Just going to be used for surfing the web and playing MP3's. Which one will be the better system to go with? A 3.06 P4 with Hyperthreading with 1GB of Memory or an Atom 330 setup that is a dual core with 4 HT's and 4 gigs of ram?
As someone who has both, I'd definitely get the Atom: the P4 is faster but uses much more power, makes much more noise, and you really don't need the extra performance for what you plan on doing. If you get the Intel Atom board you probably will want to replace the standard chipset fan with a silent one though (a five minute job with a screwdriver and about $5 for the fan).
If you already have the P4 system (or any old system really) use it and don't waste your cash.
Even an old PIII rig would be more than powerful enough to surf the net and play MP3's.
^+1.
I second that suggestion as an old PIII is more than enough to perform those tasks and you can generally get one for free. The only issue with that you will want to run either Windows XP or Linux as most PIII units only support 512 MB-1 GB RAM and that is a very borderline amount of RAM for Vista.
Thank you all. A friend was hard up for money so i stole his Xeon workstation for 50 bucks. Dual 3Ghz Xeons with HT, 4gigs memory and two 10K SCSI's in raid 0. WELL worth the money. I already ordered a pair of 3.8Ghz Xeon's to replace them. Should make a fine netbox.
------------------------------Core I7 920 D0 @ 4.2Ghz
MSI X58 Pro-E
32GB SSD, WD Blacks In R0
Sapphire HD 5870's In XFire
Reply to PsychoSaysDie
I got to say, a Pentium III for today's internet is not bad, but it's entirely inadequate for high bitrate flash video, such as hulu. Case in point: I built a 1.0GHz/133 bus coppermine P3 on i810e mobo for an inlaw of mine, for free. It's main use is internet, IM, and MP3s with occasional CD burning. Overall it works flawlessly, but it's still too slow for Hulu video, even with a small viewing screen, it drops frames. At this point a 2.0GHz P4 or AMD equivalent is really necessary to enjoy the web 2.0 experience, and something more along the lines of a 2.8-3.0GHz P4, Celeron 420, a current AMD sempron, or an Athlon XP around 2800+ rating is needed for a good daily use computer that will handle everything the internet has to offer. Flash has killed the PIII.
You can get easily passive heatsinks for a 3.8 GHz Nocona/Irwindale Xeon, but they're not really the passive heatsinks you have in mind. The ones you can easily get are ~one-pound solid copper units that are low-profile designed to be put in 1U or 2U rack servers. They use ducted airflow, baffles, and very noisy high-RPM, high-CFM fans. You may be able to find a desktop-style skyscraper-and-heatpipes passive heatsink for a 3.8 GHz Xeon but you need a huge one plus good case airflow as the CPUs throw off well over 100 watts. I put together a dual 2.8 Irwindale for a guy and used the 2U active heatsinks (a one-pound block of copper with a 5500-rpm fan) and those put off some serious heat. I would hate to see what the 3.8s would do.
You can get easily passive heatsinks for a 3.8 GHz Nocona/Irwindale Xeon, but they're not really the passive heatsinks you have in mind. The ones you can easily get are ~one-pound solid copper units that are low-profile designed to be put in 1U or 2U rack servers. They use ducted airflow, baffles, and very noisy high-RPM, high-CFM fans. You may be able to find a desktop-style skyscraper-and-heatpipes passive heatsink for a 3.8 GHz Xeon but you need a huge one plus good case airflow as the CPUs throw off well over 100 watts. I put together a dual 2.8 Irwindale for a guy and used the 2U active heatsinks (a one-pound block of copper with a 5500-rpm fan) and those put off some serious heat. I would hate to see what the 3.8s would do.
It has the skyscraper ones now but i'd like to get some decent ones because I had to abort a sandra processor test because temps were 80C and rising and i had no idea the thermal limit's on these chips. I'm just going to put them on water when the 3.8ghz come in.
Message edited by PsychoSaysDie on 05-11-2009 at 03:03:21 AM
------------------------------Core I7 920 D0 @ 4.2Ghz
MSI X58 Pro-E
32GB SSD, WD Blacks In R0
Sapphire HD 5870's In XFire
Reply to PsychoSaysDie
You can get easily passive heatsinks for a 3.8 GHz Nocona/Irwindale Xeon, but they're not really the passive heatsinks you have in mind. The ones you can easily get are ~one-pound solid copper units that are low-profile designed to be put in 1U or 2U rack servers. They use ducted airflow, baffles, and very noisy high-RPM, high-CFM fans. You may be able to find a desktop-style skyscraper-and-heatpipes passive heatsink for a 3.8 GHz Xeon but you need a huge one plus good case airflow as the CPUs throw off well over 100 watts. I put together a dual 2.8 Irwindale for a guy and used the 2U active heatsinks (a one-pound block of copper with a 5500-rpm fan) and those put off some serious heat. I would hate to see what the 3.8s would do.
Very true...I'm sitting beside my dual 3.8GHz Xeon box right now, and let me tell you, it is GREAT in the winter and HELL in the summer! Under this desk is the warmest spot in the shop, next to the server racks...and I do believe the old 3.8 box gives a full rack a run for its money, temp wise. Also, you should notice an increase in your power bill...doing the math on this box, it's about $30 a month or so to run 24/7. (But, hey, Flash pages are no problem, and it's getting nostalgic to run an old dual-Nocona box these 'green' days, too...and I love nostalgia!)
Go with the Atom n330 for low power and silence. The P4 for more grunt in single threaded applications. The atom would be about the same is heavily multithreaded apps but slower in single threaded apps.
I have a 3 GHz P4 w/ HT being utilized as an HTPC right now. No question that it is a hot-running beast and by no means ideal because of that (I'm only using it because its an old PC).
However, it does a great job of playing full-screen flash video (hulu), something that I've read the Atom 330's have trouble with.
I'd love to build some Atom 330 systems: they are cheap enough that I'd build one for every TV in the house. However, the inability to handle full-screen flash video is a deal-breaker.
I'd love to build some Atom 330 systems: they are cheap enough that I'd build one for every TV in the house. However, the inability to handle full-screen flash video is a deal-breaker.
What do you mean by 'full-screen'? 320x240? 640x480? 1920x1080?
The Atom 330 will almost certainly not have the raw processing power of the P4, but it won't be a slouch for the purposes you've described either. The amount of RAM and the speed of the HD will be much more important. If you can afford it, get the Atom system with the 4GB RAM, use an Intel SSD for your OS and swap file and a large 7200RPM HDD for data. This will give very good all around performance. Assuming you are using Windows 2000 or newer, also remember to disable executive paging and use a decent video solution (Nvidia 9400 or ATI 790/785G onboard, or any DX10 discrete card).
I would also recommend installing the K-lite codec pack (Available here: http://www.free-codecs.com/K_lite_codec_pack_download.htm). You can use it with WMP to play all current media formats, or use it with Media Player classic if you prefer.
Hope this helps!
Message edited by vh1atomicpunk on 09-01-2009 at 04:43:40 AM