Version: 6.8.3- Main Menu -default- Codec Menu -Encoding mode: Insane QualityEnhanced multithreadingEnabled using SSE4Quarter-pixel search- Video Menu -Quantization: MPEG-2
XviD 1.1.3
Version: 1.1.3- Other Options / Encoder Menu -Display encoding status = off
Mainconcept Reference 1.5.1Reference H.264 Plugin Pro 1.5.1
Version: 1.5.1MPEG2 to MPEG2 (H.264)MainConcept H.264/AVC Codec28 sec HDTV 1920x1080 (MPEG2)Audio: MPEG2 (44.1 kHz, 2 Channel, 16 Bit, 224 kbps)Codec: H.264Mode: PAL (25 FPS)Profile: Tom’s Hardware Settings for Qct-Core
HD Playback (Blue Ray)
PowerDVD 8Blue Ray - Disc (James Bond - "Casino Royale")Video Mode: 1920x1080p (full screen)Codec: H.264
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Benchmark
Details
Grisoft AVG Anti-Virus 8
Version: 8.0.134Virus base: 270.4.5/1533BenchmarkScan: some compressed ZIP and RAR archives
Winrar 3.80
Version 3.70 BETA 8WinZIP Commandline Version 2.3Compression = BestDictionary = 4096 KBBenchmark: THG-Workload
WinZIP 11
Version 11.2Compression = BestBenchmark: THG-Workload
Autodesk 3D Studio Max 9
Version: 9.0Rendering a Dragon picturerendering HTDV 1920x1080
Adobe Photoshop CS 3
Version: 10.0x20070321Filtering of a 69 MB TIF-PhotoBenchmark: Tomshardware-Benchmark V1.0.0.4Programmed by Tomshardware using Delphi 2007Filters:CrosshatchGlassSumi-eAccented EdgesAngled StrokesSprayed Strokes
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Benchmark
Details
3DMark Vantage
Version: 1.02Options: PerformanceGraphics Test 1Graphics Test 2CPU Test 1CPU Test 2
PCMark Vantage
Version: 1.00PCMark BenchmarkMemory BenchmarkWindows Media Player 10.00.00.3646
SiSoftware Sandra XII SP2
Version 2008.5.14.24CPU Test = CPU Arithmetic / MultiMediaMemory Test = Bandwidth Benchmark
A note on our testing here. The comparison platform populates a different form factor and employs more conventional desktop hardware versus the mobile-ish Atom. Nevertheless, the Athlon X2 4050e-based box is less expensive than the Shuttle-built package. It’s also a low-power build, though not quite as “green” as the X2700.
If you’d like to compare the Atom to VIA’s Nano platform, please have a look at the side-by-side Patrick recently published comparing Intel, AMD, and VIA low-power architectures. The purpose of this piece is to review Shuttle’s X27 and the 4050e gives us a relevant price point and a good idea of the performance available if you can fit a micro-ATX platform in your application.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
This looks like a decent system if you're looking for something to keep a small room cool and you're going to be doing productivity related tasks as well as enjoy some modest multimedia (watching a DVD). I'm actually considering the next step up early next year for a single dedicated graphics card that turns off when I'm not using 3D. If I wasn't a gamer I'd probably find this useful as a main system save for the fact that I require the redundancy of my RAID setup.
ATOM is targeted for systems that use low amounts of power so it makes absolutely no sense to try to load Vista on it.
- Vista treats memory like a RAM drive. It doesn't intelligently determine what should be loaded, it just starts loading stuff (watch your memory after a fresh install and if it reports what is actually in the memory then I sure haven't been able to find it amongst all the clutter). 2GB is enough for most systems and the vast majority of games with the page file disabled though Vista "requires" about 4GB to run smoothly which there in and of itself negates the point of Microsoft shipping 32 bit version.
- Since Vista treats memory like a RAM drive it creates unnecessary wear on the hard drive. If you're looking to maximize the life span of your system (as well as ensure it's responsive) you should only load what you're using and with an INTELLIGENT caching system only preload associated files. For example many games have launchers (launcher.exe and game.exe)...obviously this is an example of when you DO want to cache something. User habits (loading Firefox after Open Office numerous times) would also justify caching.
It's good to finally see computers physically getting smaller. It's a decent system, maybe a decent starter system for someone who isn't in to gaming.
John,
As a main system, I promise this thing would frustrate the heck out of you. I personally love the concept, but couldn't work with the implementation. Give me a low-power desktop configuration, at least, for performing desktop tasks.
I'd prefer to see the comparison against the 740G or a 780G integrated graphics. The difference against a 4670 is too big, both in performance and in power usage.
drfelipI'd prefer to see the comparison against the 740G or a 780G integrated graphics. The difference against a 4670 is too big, both in performance and in power usage.
It's still going to be a huge performance difference, and the 4670 really didn't play too big of a role here since I didn't run games. Should you wish to sub in the standard 740G or 780G graphics, however, you can also subtract $90 from the price tag of the desktop setup.
i think, we have to take the topic system in its parts.
for me, the shuttle x27 is bang on if the tasks are internet surfing, email, or microsoft office. this is sufficient for my sisters. :)
also can be 24 hour computer that serves various media while downloading/uploading torrents. :p
for home theater setups, as said in the article, is futile.
but, that doesn't say the atom 230 is bad at all. we can buy a motherboard embedded with an atom 230 that has pci express and install a 4670 on it. in the future,i am sure there will be integrated graphics that could.
if the market says im wrong,well intel can produce lots of atom 330 dual core immediately.
cangelini, why don't you use mini-itx 780g+downclocked amd x2(or phenom 9150e)
http://www.techpowerup.com/72847/Albatron_Readying_its_AMD_780G_Mini-ITX_Motherboard.html
it will be killer for HTPC and still use low amounts of power.
I would have liked to see a 780G compete against the Atom platform too. Especially regarding power consumption. IMHO you missed the point by comparing an Atom system to a system with dedicated graphics.
anomousWell, I would have liked to see a 780G compete against the Atom platform too. Especially regarding power consumption. IMHO you missed the point by comparing an Atom system to a system with dedicated graphics.
I do see your point--one angle could have been trying to pare both systems down to an absolute minimum. But if you're going to end up paying $400+ for the X2700, why not compare what you could get from a comparable lightweight desktop as well? In this case, you can add a $90 graphics card and still come in under the Shuttle's price--AND do exceptionally well in Vista.
Basically there are two ways of comparing an AMD based system to an Atom based system. Either you take the prize tag as a lead, thus one could add more horsepower (either graphics, as in your case, or CPU power, Phenom f.e.) to the AMD system. Or one could take the capabilities as a lead, thus one could come up with an AMD system that might be cheaper and with only marginally higher power consumption on average. IMHO the last way is the more logical one, as Intel doesn't market the Atom platform as a new, powerful all purpose platform, but as a cheap, "good-enough" platform with unmatched power efficiency. And as I doubt the last point, I would have appreciated a 780G based competitor in this review even more.
A solid review but I still can't see a valid market niche for the Atom compared to other offerings.
It would have been good to throw in a low end E series cpu and match up the video a bit better - I note your reasons above.
You would be hard pressed to out match a low end X2 in terms of value for money as a HTPC.
Perhaps that might make a good future review.
Another choice might be to play with the various X2 and Core2 low end cpu's in a bit of an underclocking experiment to get the best of power vs performance.
Some users have gotten stellar results underclocking the new 45nm Intel core2 line as well ...
