Join for quick access. Enter your email below and we'll send confirmation plus sign you up to our newsletter.
By submitting your information, you confirm you are aged 16 or over,
have read our
Privacy Policy
and agree to the
Terms & Conditions. Geographical rules apply.
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.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Join the club
Get full access to premium articles, exclusive features and a growing list of member rewards.
An account already exists for this email address, please log in.
Shuttle XS29F: Is VIA's Nano Processor Powerful Enough?
Shuttle internal 12V to ATX, Seasonic external 100-240V to 12V/5A
Corsair CMPSU-850HX EPS12V, 80-Plus Gold
Optical
Opticarc BD ROM BC-5500S
Software
OS
Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit SP1
Graphics
VIA 21.09.01L
Intel GMA 15.8.3.1504
Intel GMA 15.9.9.1527
Chipset
VIA HyperionPro 5.24A
Intel INF 9.0.0.1008
Intel INF 9.0.0.1009
VIA’s Nano processor might be 64-bit capable, but Windows Vista x64 requires a hotfix to operate with it. Since that hotfix has not been rolled into a service pack and integrated into a DVD, users would be forced to slipstream it to their installation DVD prior to installation. This might not be a problem for Windows 7 users, but our benchmarks have not been updated to run under this yet-to-be-released OS. Thus, all systems were tested using Vista x86 and a few of our benchmarks were rolled back to the 32-bit version.
We tried to keep the performance-per-watt comparison as fair as possible by carrying over most parts, though the power supply used by the Nano and Atom didn’t have an ATX12V output required for the microATX platform. A further search of our labs revealed no high-efficiency low-power units.
Normally this would be a problem, since power supply efficiency often drops significantly at anything below 20% of its rated capacity. The 80 PLUS Gold rating of Corsair’s CMPSU-850HX, along with its highly-favorable certification charts, gave us hope, and further testing proved this enormous unit capable of delivering superior efficiency compared to any of our previous-generation, lower-capacity units.
Version 1.2.1-04122008 Display encoding status = off
WinRAR
Release version 3.80 Recompressing 334MB folder of compressed files
WinZip 12
Version 12.0 Pro (8252), best compression 334MB folder of compressed files WinZip Command Line version 3.0
Synthetics
PCMark Vantage
Version 1.0.0.0 (32-bit)
Sandra 2009
Version 2009.4.15.92
Our hopes for a test of true office applications were dashed when we found the VIA Nano platform unable to complete any version of SYSMark. Its graphics driver was most troublesome, appearing incompatible with one of SYSMark 2007 Preview’s video encoding tests, while SYSMark 2004 SE threw fits under Windows Vista x86.
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.
Wouldn't this just be a linux-only machine then? I can't possibly see any other use for it other than maybe a childs pc or a general "Internet & Email only" PC.
This may be a dumb question, but why was Xp not used for this test? Clearly "just barely" wont work for people who spend their hard earn money on something like this. Maybe the celeron is ok for vista basic but the atom and nano platforms are just not good enough for Vista. If I can make an analogy comparing Vista and Atom/Nano it's like an old 73' Corolla trying to haul ten tons uphill.
I agree that the major drawback of this review is the use of Microsoft Vista. I think that Windows XP Home edition for ULPC or a netbook spin of a linux distro (e.g. Ubuntu) would have been a much better choice for this review, especialy since is very well known that Vista is just not the right choice for netbooks (or nettops). Some time ago I read several reviews of the nano processor, based on Win XP and they performed more than OK, they were even suitable for a small HTPC at that time (the toughest challenge was DVD playback back then) and with a better chipset would have performed even netter. But this happens when a resource hungry OS like vista is used... just my 2 cents.
i guess a windoze xp or 7 would be a lot better to use with this kind of hardware. in fact i cannot think at a more inapropriate os to run on a nentop than vista. :)
maybe the performance delta would be the same but the usability would be more than "acceptable".
regarding the "benchmarking" stuff... i do not think that anybody sane would buy a nettop to use it for hardcore photo editiing or transcoding.
if i'd buy a nettop i'd be interested in several factors:
- to be powerfull enough for office work and maybe hd playback
- to use as little power as possible (which nano does nicely) as this kind of device would be rarely powered down
- to be silent (which nano is)
i think that performance per watt is irrelevant here as a system like this is not meant to be "performant". i think that the one that uses less watts, has more features is queter wins here.
my take on this is that via has a very nice platform and nano wins even if it's not the fastest.
I just took a look at Via's website and it seems that Nano is available in flavors up to 1.8GHz. I wish a machine based on such a processor was used for this review, though I think the main issue here is availability.
