ASUS Eee PC 1000HE Netbook - A Home and Office Powerhouse?


First, here's a subjective evaluation of performance. I used the 1000HE for an extended period for web browsing, email, word processing and spreadsheet work. Applications opened quickly. Data entry was quick and very easy with the large keyboard. Paging and Internet access were fast. My work was always saved to the 160GB hard disk drive in a flash. I have no qualms about using either the 1000HA or 1000HE for office work. And, I was very satisfied with battery life, which in my real world experience ran about 5 hours.

I used PerfTest from PassMark Software to test the 1000HE. PerfTest is a very good, comprehensive testing suite that, unlike FutureMark’s PCMark Vantage products, can run on both Windows Vista and XP computers.

The PerfTest measured performance of the ASUS Eee PC 1000HE’s Atom N280 processor compared quite closely with that of an old Intel Celeron 1.33MHz processor, data for which is in PassMark’s database library. I’ll spare you the details of those numbers. Instead, I want to compare some PerfTest numbers for the 1000HE with those from my daily workhorse Toshiba M200-ST2002 standard notebook.

My purpose here is not to compare apples and oranges. Rather I want you to see how the 1000HE at $375 compares with the Toshiba that cost me almost $1300 back in late 2007; upgrades to the Toshiba’s memory cost another $100 and a Vista Ultimate upgrade added $200. So, call it $1600. I’ll talk more about non-netbook alternatives in the next section.

Test Computer Configuration and PerfTest Results (Higher Scores Are Better)

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Computer ConfigurationASUS Eee PC 1000HEToshiba M200-ST2002
ProcessorIntel Atom N280 1.66GhzIntel Mobile Core 2 Duo T7100 1.80GHz
Memory1GB DDR2-667MHz at 333MHz3GB DDR2-667MHz at 333MHz
Main HDDSeagate ST9160310AS 160GB, 5400 RPM, SATA-IIToshiba MK-2035GSS, 200GB, 5400 RPM, SATA-I
ChipsetIntel 945GSE, Intel GMA 950 Graphics ProcessorIntel GM965, Intel GMA 3100 Graphics Processor
Operating SystemWindows XP Home SP 3Windows Vista Ultimate SP 1
Row 5 - Cell 0 Row 5 - Cell 1 Row 5 - Cell 2
PerfTest ResultsASUS Eee PC 1000HEToshiba M200-ST2002
CPU Mark198.6865.7
2D Graphics Mark115.2200.4
Memory Mark168.1376.1
Disk Mark423.1130.1
3D Graphics Mark59.294.3
PassMark Rating191.7366.8

PerfTest does a number of CPU, graphics, memory and disk tests. It then summarizes these into basic categories. These are the “Mark” numbers above. The benchmark also computes a single value that summarizes all the tests, the PassMark Rating.

The 1000HE is clearly no match for the M200-ST2002, except in the disk drive category, where the 1000HE’s SATA II interface and drive give it a marked advantage. Do note, however, that the 1000HE’s graphics performance is still pretty good compared to the M200-ST2002. Watching the displays on the two computers during the tests, it was difficult to see a significant difference in performance. Note again, however, that the 1000HE ran at a display resolution of 1024x600, while the Toshiba’s display ran at 1280x800.

  • cadder
    I have wanted a netbook for casual use and travel, because they are small and cheap, even though I have a very fast desktop and 2 15" laptops, one of which is pretty powerful. My wife wanted a small and light laptop for Christmas so I ended up buying her a 12" Toshiba. It cost 3 times what some netbooks cost, and even though it has a 1.4GHz processor, it is about twice as fast as a netbook. I wasn't sure if a netbook would be fast enough for her, and I'm sure she would not have been happy with the smaller screen and keyboard. I think the netbooks are probably plenty powerful, and eventually they will evolve more to blend in with the smaller laptops. Hopefully they won't get more expensive in the process. With good battery life as a plus, this ASUS seems like a good model and I agree that lots of people could use it as their only computer, even some business travelers.
  • caiusmartius123
    I want a netbook soooo bad, but I still feel that 1024 x 600 is UNACCEPTABLE, at any size. That is the 1 thing holding me back and has held me back for so long. Why can't they just use a 1280 x 800 (better) or a 1366 x 768 (optimal) panel? I'm not asking for full 1080p (and at screen sizes of 10" and 12" that would be stupid and unecessary).

    I can't be the only who feels this way after using a netbook with a 1024 x 600 screen.
  • From what I've read, XP is the problem. MS decided to restrict resolutions on the XP they allow for Netbooks to 1024x600, so manufacturers are making the screens that resolution.
  • cleeve
    1024x600 is a very usable resolution on this size of screen if you've ever tried it.

    Even the older 800x480 screens were passable to get the job done, although sometimes you'd have to scroll the screen. But with 1024x600, this is much less of a problem.
  • barryegerber
    I can remember far enough back to the days of the Compaq luggable portable with a 9 inch 25 line by 80 character screen, it weighed 28 pounds and was a great way to lengthen your arms. I carried two of them, one in each arm, across the San Francisco airport one miserable day. I always remember that day whenever I get misty about the good old days.

  • presto311
    I own a 1000H and love it. I successfully ran windows vista for a few months and now have the windows 7 beta installed. I did upgrade to 2 gigs of ram though. It runs the OS great, even with aero running. The 1024x600 resolution hasn't really been a problem. If it was increased anymore stuff would be too small to see. I highly recommend this netbook. Great all around. I have a powerful desktop for gaming and everything else, so this netbook is perfect for school to use for internet and taking notes. I occasionally watch tv shows on it too and it works fine!
  • radguy
    Netbooks are pretty neat but you should expect these devices to do what they are designed for. Its small low power very portable internet laptop device. Yes it can do a lot more than surf the web but it was meant as a device to pull out at the coffee shop and check email or go online. I waited for a long time and finally picked up the 3 cell msi wind for 300 bucks with a coupon. on xp it handels just about anything I have thrown at it but games ( I tried farcry, fear, and several others that I had problems with because they wanted a cd install and after 2 hours off trying to get around it gave up). But office, itunes, movies, the occasional time wasting games like snood and peggle). I installed win 7 and have been very happy. It doesn't have the speed of xp but it runs fine as long as you don't try to do too much at once. I put an extra gig of ram and turbo mode is really nice. I will note the battery sucked buy I bought a 6 cell.
    My problem with the eee 1000H was the looks more than anything. the 1000HE is a slight improvement but the 1002 would be better. However the N280 without the better chipset isn't worth the extra money so we wait for the new chipset. The battery life does make it a very nice deal for the price though.

    The product isn't really a laptop and even though you can buy a nice 13 inch laptop for 600 bucks which I would recomend if needed more speed. The xp, atom, gma 950 does more than what need for the basics. It should be noted that most of the people who would read this would want more than the basics so take that into consideration before judging the product. I am hoping for some better designs and upgraded tech for the 12 inch ish market at about 400-500 but intels atom and windows xp restictions are causing some major problems with that.

    Thanks for the review

  • bosjee
    I don't understand why all these manufactures cannot make the netbook any thinner.
  • presto311
    bosjeeI don't understand why all these manufactures cannot make the netbook any thinner.
    There are a few reasons. I think mostly they want to keep the cost down, since that's one of the main concepts. Cheap, basic, portable, simple. The parts and engineering for an ultra slim like the mac air require more money to produce.
  • randomizer
    Anyone tried running Visual Studio on this low resolution?