Skip to main content

Lenovo's Atom-powered C100 is Cheap, Cheerful

Following its launch of the ThinkPad X200 and T400s, the company has something a little more modest to offer those with little need for a full blown desktop. The company today announced the C100, an Atom-based all in one that boasts an 18.5-inch, 16:9 display with Intel's Atom 230 single core or the 330 dual core as well as a DVD burner/reader, 4 USB ports, GMA950 integrated graphics, 1 GB of RAM, a 160 GB (5400 RPM) hard drive. Top it all off with Windows XP and the starting price of $399 is almost too good to be true. Any takers? Let us know in the comments below!

  • LORD_ORION
    Please stop buying this crap. You can build something twice as powerful on your own.
    Reply
  • WheelsOfConfusion
    LORD_ORIONPlease stop buying this crap. You can build something twice as powerful on your own.People in the market for slim all-in-ones usually aren't the kind that build powerful systems for themselves.
    Reply
  • It's fine if you don't mind a painfully slow computer, but for anyone wanting something faster than my first computer I built in 2001(bleeding edge Athon XP), it's going to be a bit disappointing.
    Reply
  • Pyroflea
    LORD_ORION, please post your slim, monitor-only PC you have built yourself. Thanks. :)
    Reply
  • jellob
    @LORD_ORION:

    You can build something twice as powerful, but would that be in the same budget range? Including a similar size monitor (that's doesn't have to be a touchscreen) which is probably already 30-40% of the budget? So leaving less than $300 to build the rest. Every little thing counts, including keyboard and mouse!
    Reply
  • ckthecerealkiller
    Sounds like a good choice to me. Not quite an Nvidia ION or anything but def better then a netbook.
    Reply
  • The_Blood_Raven
    Athlon_XP_FTWIt's fine if you don't mind a painfully slow computer, but for anyone wanting something faster than my first computer I built in 2001(bleeding edge Athon XP), it's going to be a bit disappointing.
    The 330 is a little faster than an Athlon X2 3800+ with a 230 being a about on par with an Athlon 64 3800+, your XP couldn't keep up.
    Reply
  • climber
    Don't forget folks that pretty much every IT manager of any corporation or organization of any size has the agenda of having every user except themselves have thin clients, since we all (not them) do exactly the same job, essentially nothing needing any computing power beyond a keyboard, monitor and mouse. They're the only ones needing computing power and all the money associated with building server farms, computing clusters and dictating everything the rest of us are allowed to do. Pretty soon we'll have to phone the helpdesk to go take a poop.
    Reply
  • pepperman
    http://laptoping.com/intel-atom-benchmark.html
    the atom 1.6 GHz is closer to a P3 tualatin 1.4 GHz actually

    http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-4801-view-Intel-atom-1.6-Ghz-benchmark.html
    It's definitely slower than an Athlon 3000+

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Atom-Athlon-Efficient,1997.html
    In fact it's slower than an Athlon 2000+
    Reply
  • Pyroflea
    Even the single core atom that I've used was a lot slower than the 3300+ computer that we unfortunately still have in this house. That's the single core, so the dual must be faster than that.
    Reply