Can't decide for a netbook within following specifications..

[zmot]

Hi everyone,

I'm looking for a netbook that is good with movies, some not-very-demanding games, has a decent battery lenght and doesnt cost more then 450€

these are the desired specifications:

size: 11,6" (maybe up to 12")
processor: 1,6 Ghz (probably single core, since I don't think I would actually benfit from dual core )
Ram: 2GB , (preferrably with slots for up to 4GB)
Decent graphics

I've found some close to this descriptions:
Asus Eee PC 1201T
Asus Eee PC 1201N
Samsung N510

Each lack something, the Asus one for example is not supposed to have a good batery lenght but has a decent price unlike the N510 and so on..

Do you know any other ones that would about fit the description, what do u think of these ones, what would you recommend, any other oppinions on computer specifications?

Thanks

[ThisIsNot]

1) 11.6" screen sizes (and larger) are dominated with models featuring AMD processors and non-Atom CPUs. So don't limit yourself to just having a single-core dinky 1.6GHz Atom processor. There is absolutely nothing holding you back from getting a dual-core netbook. A dual-core netbook will also last you a whole lot longer.

2) You won't find a single Atom equipped netbook, currently on the market and not featuring the dual-core Atom N500, that can handle 4GB of RAM. They are all limited to 2GB. Again, most 11.6" netbooks come with either a Pentium processor, Pentium ULV, AMD Neo, I have come across a couple with a Core i3 ULV, a Core 2 Solo, and a Core 2 Duo ULV chip. Many of those can handle up to 4GB of RAM but not the standard Atom N270/280/450 models.

3) Decent graphics... Even the Intel 3000 series used in more recent netbooks is rather dull and can barely handle 320p YouTube videos. You would want something with either an ION/ION2 chip or ATI HD series graphics. Again, you won't find that with a single-core Atom unit.

4) Battery life is something that is lacking with 11.6" models. It seems that many 12-13" and 10" portables can easily obtain 8 hours of operation but most 11.6" netbooks sit at around 6 hours. Not bad but not as well as you would probably like.

All-in-all, I suggest you go looking for different netbooks that don't use the Atom N450/270/280 chip. They will give you better operational performance for your money and you won't likely find a modern 11.6" netbook running a single-core Atom that is worth your while.

[zmot]

Thanks for the useful info.
So what i've come across was the Asus 1215N 12inch netbook (im ok with 12" too) which is featuring ION2 graphics up to 4gb ram and a dual core Intel Atom D525 processor (1.8GHz).

So what do you think about this netbook (mostly cpu unit) ? I've read your post and now im sceptic about the atom processor. How would u compare this CPU to lets say an Intel Core 2 Duo Processor SU7300 (1.30 GHz) or Intel Pentium Dual Core SU4100 1.3 GHz which runs the Acer Aspire Timeline 1810TZ ? Or maybe to AMD Athlon Neo MV-40 1.6 GHz which is single core ?

Also with AMD Neo, are there any 11-12" netbooks with dual core amd at all ?

Do you maybe know some other subnotebooks similar to the one i've found but with different (better) processors ?

[ericinboston]

Originally Posted by zmot

Thanks for the useful info.
So what i've come across was the Asus 1215N 12inch netbook (im ok with 12" too) which is featuring ION2 graphics up to 4gb ram and a dual core Intel Atom D525 processor (1.8GHz).

So what do you think about this netbook (mostly cpu unit) ? I've read your post and now im sceptic about the atom processor. How would u compare this CPU to lets say an Intel Core 2 Duo Processor SU7300 (1.30 GHz) or Intel Pentium Dual Core SU4100 1.3 GHz which runs the Acer Aspire Timeline 1810TZ ? Or maybe to AMD Athlon Neo MV-40 1.6 GHz which is single core ?

I have to chime in here...and there have been other threads like this...folks, if you're asking about super technical details on CPU vs. CPU, you're not in the market for a netbook...and you are implying that you are not going to use a netbook for its designed purposes.

Netbooks are designed to be physically light, physically small, offer great battery life, while offering LOW PERFORMANCE. Period. If you plan to run thick client applications on a netbook other than Adobe Reader, IE/Firefox, and iTunes, you're apps are going to drag. Use the netbook for web surfing, email, light video playback, chat, photo viewing, some itunes and you will be fine.

Want to run MS Office 2010? Get a notebook. Wanna run Photoshop or Dreamweaver? Get a notebook. Wanna edit video footage and/or master a dvd? Get a notebook. Wanna play WoW? Get a notebook. Wanna play any game that is more complex than Solitaire? Get a notebook.

Yes, you may be able to get some high end netbooks that will barely meet your expectations of application performance...but the goal of a netbook is not performance.

My brother-in-law just got a killer Dell Inspiron 17 to his door last week for $600. 500GB 7200RPM hard drive, Core i CPU, 4GB ram, dvd/cd burner, Windows 7 Home or Premium, and a great video card.

If you're in the CPU vs. CPU conversation this deep, forget your $399 netbook and spend a little more money and get an inexpensive notebook that will blow it away for performance.

-Eric

[zmot]

thanks for the rant eric and although we all realise the obvious stuff you wrote you should also keep in mind that im lookin for an up to max 12" size computer (subnotebook) with the best possible performance with a little regard to the price. So since im not going for a 15" notebook im not interested in how much better they perform. And i think there is a difference between a netbook with the oldest intel atom chip clocked at 800Mhz, 512 Mb RAM, and integrated acclerated graphics and one that has dual core cpu with 1800Ghz, 4Gb Ram, and the latest ION2 graphics.. but what do i know, i havent done the great solitaire test on both of them like you..

[ericinboston]

Originally Posted by zmot

thanks for the rant eric and although we all realise the obvious stuff...

Not "everyone" realizes the stuff I said...hence why I posted...and why I specifically made a reference to other "threads" like yours.

...you should also keep in mind that im lookin for an up to max 12" size computer (subnotebook) with the best possible performance with a little regard to the price. So since im not going for a 15" notebook im not interested in how much better they perform. And i think there is a difference between a netbook with the oldest intel atom chip clocked at 800Mhz, 512 Mb RAM, and integrated acclerated graphics and one that has dual core cpu with 1800Ghz, 4Gb Ram, and the latest ION2 graphics.. but what do i know, i havent done the great solitaire test on both of them like you..

1)You should have been VERY specific in your original and subsequent posts. You originally stated "I'm looking for a netbook that is good with movies, some not-very-demanding games, has a decent battery lenght and doesnt cost more then 450€". There is no mention in here about a maximum screen size (and thus I would have been more careful of my suggestion that you can get a larger-size-screen computer)...and certainly your description does not warrant a high end CPU.

2)You seem to know (or think you know) so much about the CPUs...then why are you coming here asking for opinions? If you know it all, go buy the darn money-is-no-object netbook that you crave.

3)You state you are uninterested in dual-cores but then you are (the Core 2 Duo reference) and want us (or someone) to compare 3-4 CPUs for you?!


Sheeeez...you sound like someone else that was kicked off this board a few weeks ago for the same type of question/reply topics that go nowhere and/or take big changes in direction, all the while promoting yourself as the know-it-all...wonder if he's back under a new name.


-Eric

[zmot]

Originally Posted by ericinboston

1)You should have been VERY specific in your original and subsequent posts...

I wrote the size im lookin for is 11,6" MAYBE up to 12".. but i guess 'maybe up to 12' doesnt imply that im not looking for bigger ones.. ill be more specific next time sorry

Originally Posted by ericinboston

...and certainly your description does not warrant a high end CPU.

Yeah it didnt, but if you would take your time to actually read the 3 posts in this topic, you'd see that i got some great info about cpu units that made me change my mind or at least skeptic about the processor i wanted in the first place, which i thought was preety high end.

Originally Posted by ericinboston

2)You seem to know (or think you know) so much about the CPUs...then why are you coming here asking for opinions? If you know it all, go buy the darn money-is-no-object netbook that you crave.

I never boasted about my knowledge of cpu units, since i for instance can admit that i know squat about them.. However, if u dont even realize the difference between the two processors i wrote earlier, you know even less. Also please stop writing like a 5 year old with stuff like "If you know it all, go buy the darn money-is-no-object netbook that you crave" because its really childish and unnecessary. I didnt even say that money is no object.. i said i still have a little regard for money which means as i already wrote, that a subnotebook above 450€ is out of the question..

Originally Posted by ericinboston

3)You state you are uninterested in dual-cores but then you are (the Core 2 Duo reference) and want us (or someone) to compare 3-4 CPUs for you?!

I believe that someone with some knowledge about processors could easily write for instance, in which cases dual core is better then single, or if the atom one i stated would perform better then the SU one, regarding the clock speed and characteristics of the processor and so on..

But yeah.. Thanks for killing this topic, I was really happy to finaly get some good advice (thank you ThisIsNot), but i guess due to people like you this topic really wont go anyhere. Also i did detect you have some unresolved personal issues by the way you write/attack posts. Do take care of them before you ruin another topic please.

[ericinboston]

Did you even look at the Network Comparison chart on the top of this website? For someone "who knows squat" about CPUs, you sure took your time to give us all the specs on numerous CPU models in numerous posts. You also immediately changed the direction of the original post from something that was "help me find a netbook" to "tell me which CPUs are best".

Look...we see these "help me pick a netbook" posts every week. You posted a question, left out some details (which is fine), then kept changing your mind regarding tech specs and asking for people to compare CPU performance for you...if you want that kind of CPU vs. CPU benchmarking, this is not the site...maybe CNET or Intel themselves can give you the results.

You also asked for a subnotebook recommendation...which I replied stating in general inexpensive notebooks are going to have better performance than any high end netbook. My particular example was not a subnotebook, but showed that for $600 (US dollars), you can get a killer tech-spec machine AND a nice big display. If you don't want the large display, fine...but you've changed your mind so many times how am I supposed to know that you want a 12" or less monitor-machine?

Your 450€ is about $585 US dollars...that's the extreme end of the netbook pricing market. Even if we all rounded down to you spending $500 US dollars, you're going to get far far better performance out of a $600 notebook than a $500 netbook...and feel free to shop Dell or other notebook vendors for screens smaller than 17"...many are still 13" and 15". Dell sells, at full list price before any coupons or codes, 8 notebooks under $500 ranging from 14" to 17" screens. Dell also sells 21 notebooks between $500 and $800...10 of them that are between $500 and $599(remember that your limit is $585 in US dollars) come in 14", 15", and 17" sizes. These are just examples.

I do not have said personal issues...if you re-read all the posts here, you were the one getting snippy and being sarcastic.

[ThisIsNot]

No need to snap at someone when they were just trying to help you zmot. As Eric pointed out, we see these types of posts all the time. Which netbook should I buy, which netbook is right for me, perfect student netbook... Both Eric and I have helped out others in the past regarding this very same question. In fact, my normal statements tend to be regurgitated every time someone brings up a topic similar to yours.

Additionally, also pointed out by Eric, your budget represents the extreme end of the netbook market where you would be better off getting an actual notebook even if it had a 12-13" screen. The Intel Atom processor was designed to perform the bare basics of computing tasks while consuming drastically low amounts of power. It allows manufacturers to push the 10 hour boundary with their netbooks while sacrificing greatly when it comes to performance. You can't directly compare GHz to GHz of processors, that is not how technology works.

Back in the day (2005) when I purchased my notebook, it came with a 2GHz Pentium M processor. That was the second fastest Pentium M chip at the time with another one beating it by a lowly 100MHz. I purchased the 17" notebook to replace my desktop that had a 2.5GHz Pentium 4 processor. Despite the Pentium M clocking in at a slower speed, it ran circles around the Pentium 4 in my desktop and could even compete with the higher end 3GHz Pentium 4 chips.

Just like with the Atom processor, it is not going to perform as well when compared to even slower chips. As I said; the dual-core AMD Neo, Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Duo ULV, Core i series, Core i ULV series, Pentium ULV, Core 2 Solo, and Core 2 Solo ULV are all going to outperform the newer 1.8GHz dual-core Atom processor.

The new dual-core Atom processor has two advantages: it consumes less power than all the previous chip lines and each core is hyper-threaded which means that they can handle two streams of instructions at once. This means that the processor itself is better for multi-tasking. Given that, it will still take longer to actually run a process when compared to ALL the chip lines I mentioned. So the multi-tasking capabilities don't outweigh the slow chip.

Given your price, you should not have any trouble finding a 12" notebook with great specs. If I were going to buy something on a $550 budget now, it would be the Acer Aspire TimelineX AS1830T-3927. It has a 12" LED LCD display at 1366X768, gigiabit ethernet, 802.11n wi-fi, 2GB of RAM (support for up to 3GB, you don't need 4GB unless a specific program requires it and there isn't going to be a single program requiring 4GB of RAM that will run on ANY Core i3 or i5 system), Intel HD graphics capable of playing 1080p videos (both YouTube and videos stored on your computer), multi-in-one card reader, 8 hour rated battery life (which means you should get around 6-7 hours of real world usage), 320GB hard drive, and the new Intel Core i3 ULV 1.2GHz processor. The processor is dual-core and hyper-threaded which means not only would it be worlds better than the Atom (and even a dual-core AMD Neo) but it can also multi-task with ease.

The whole ultra-thin notebook comes in at 3 lbs which is 0.2 lbs more than a typical netbook. The end price on a few websites is $599 but you should be able to find it for less from other retailers (I was using Newegg.com and they tend to be expensive with newer products).