Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Intel Hardware Technology

Intel's New Atom D510 Benchmark Tested 86

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the needs-more-than-new dept.
adeelarshad82 writes "The Atom processor in nettops and netbooks is one of Intel's success stories for 2009. Recently PCMag put the new Intel Atom D510 processor through its paces, to see how it stacks up against previous generation Atom CPUs. Using a whitebox system from Intel, they ran their usual set of benchmark tests on the system. In summary the D510-equipped whitebox finished neck and neck with the dual-core powered Acer R3610-U9012. So while there are differences between the two, if you already have a nettop running the dual-core Intel Atom 330 processor you won't have to upgrade 'just because' there's a new CPU in the wings."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel's New Atom D510 Benchmark Tested

Comments Filter:
  • A chip released in 2009 is still on par with a PIII from close to a decade ago?

    Although lower power is always nice.
    • Re:So in other words (Score:5, Informative)

      by maxume (22995) on Monday December 21, 2009 @06:53PM (#30518500)

      Lower power, lower cost, bigger L2.

    • It's an admission (Score:5, Insightful)

      by macraig (621737) <`mark.a.craig' `at' `gmail.com'> on Monday December 21, 2009 @07:12PM (#30518628)

      The very existence of netbooks and nettops are an admission by the entire industry that the majority of tasks performed by computers these days are served well enough by a "Pentium III", perhaps with the addition of a better GPU than existed back then.

      It's confirmation of the old suspicion that computers were becoming TOO powerful for most current uses, that hardware has been advancing quicker than the typical needs of the software. While everyone may benefit from a quad-core 3GHz CPU once in a while, it's not many of us even here that require it every hour of the day (you guys playing Forged Alliance in Mom's converted basement are excepted). It's that "subjective experience" bit all over again: having to wait longer than an instant for something to complete, even just for a few minutes total a day, is the subjective experience that sticks with us, while we conveniently forget the good times that went on the rest of those 24 hours. It's like what they say about it being the little (negative) things that wind up killing marriages.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 21, 2009 @07:45PM (#30518814)

        That is why Flash was developed. It requires lots of resources even for simple tasks. It brings back the computing experience of the late 90s.

        • It's part of a conspiracy of a world-wide cartel of efficiency-oriented programmer that control computing, to ensure their skills remain in demand. Whenever computers start getting too fast, they contrive another layer. The iPhone is another of their strategies.

      • Frankly to the detriment of my own business I have done more repair and upgrade than new builds. I'm a bit too honest for my own good I guess, but I just don't see the point in telling a customer that the upgrade they think they need could be achieved through more ram or a better video card. There are some exceptions of course but mostly heavy gamers or those into audio/video stuff. I used to upgrade every 6-8 months, but my main desktop I have had for going on 3 years. In fact the only machines I have

        • Indeed, that's the case now for the most part. The last two upgrades I've had (laptop & desktop) have been because the prior one broke. While it's nicer to be able to render something in 15 seconds vs 60, it's still long enough that there's a definite gap. (Also, 15 seconds is in some ways more annoying, because at a minute, you are free to do something else, 15 seconds isn't enough time to finish much of anything.)

      • by evilviper (135110)

        The very existence of netbooks and nettops are an admission by the entire industry that the majority of tasks performed by computers these days are served well enough by a "Pentium III", perhaps with the addition of a better GPU than existed back then.

        No matter how far back you go, portable computers ALWAYS had CPUs slower than their desktop counterparts for the sake of lower heat, and longer battery life.

        When the majority of DESKTOP PCs use such slow CPUs, THEN you might have a point. Right now, you're ju

      • $ uptime
        17:04:37 up 3 days, 7:03, 0 users, load average: 0.04, 0.06, 0.01
        $ cpufreq-info | grep "cpufreq stats"
        cpufreq stats: 2.40 GHz:1.97%, 2.13 GHz:0.03%, 1.87 GHz:0.04%, 1.60 GHz:97.97% (302491)
        cpufreq stats: 2.40 GHz:2.11%, 2.13 GHz:0.02%, 1.87 GHz:0.03%, 1.60 GHz:97.84% (254077)
        cpufreq stats: 2.40 GHz:2.18%, 2.13 GHz:0.02%, 1.87 GHz:0.02%, 1.60 GHz:97.78% (203704)
        cpufreq stats: 2.40 GHz:1.15%, 2.13 GHz:0.01%, 1.87 GHz:0.01%, 1.60

      • by w0mprat (1317953)
        I disagree. I as an experiment reccently fired up my old Pentium III 512mb workstation which was well specc'd to run Windows XP in it's era, it was slow compared to my more reccent machines to that point I wondered how we ever put up with it, and the thing ran to 100% cpu use on the first javascript laden web page I encountered. This made me realise our perception of performance has changed, and really what we see as simple tasks, such as viewing photos from our digital camera are now much more intensive th
        • by macraig (621737)

          You were taking my comments more literally and absolutely than they were intended; I didn't literally mean a Pentium III should be fine. I meant it relative to, say, a Core i7 or a Phenom II X4 9950. In that context, your Atom is the figurative Pentium III, good enough for 90% of what needs to get done without being SO under-performing that it actually causes a material problem. If it causes perceptual problems, well... be patient and get over it. :-)

      • by Ozric (30691)

        The very existence of netbooks and nettops are an admission by the entire industry that the majority of tasks performed by computers these days are served well enough by a "Pentium III", perhaps with the addition of a better GPU than existed back then..

        I agree 100% the problem is Code Bloat and no optimization.

    • That isn't exactly the surprising thing. If you look around, people are still spinning new embedded 386 cores, with all the screaming performance of 25 years ago.

      What is very significant is that performance a decade old is being marketed directly to end users, in more or less overtly "computer" shaped packages. If you count embedded stuff, you can find all sorts of archaisms hanging around; but the fact that old performance is showing up in new computers, meant for individual use, is quite interesting.
  • It sucks.... Major balls... I have an Point Of View Atom 330 motherboard and it's barely usable for common task like surfing, email and word processing. I only tried it using Ubuntu, but I have an ION version so it should compensate for video display. Frankly.... No... It doesn't. Flash video is barely usable, Flash games like Farmville on Facebook are unusable.

    I know, I know... the focus is low power, but my Asus EEE 701 4G does better with it's Celeron 900MHz. So saying that it's barely better than a

    • by afidel (530433)
      Are you running Flash 10.1? It's supposed to make a HUGE difference on underpowered platforms.
    • by anss123 (985305)

      Flash games like Farmville on Facebook

      Gave my sister an 2.4 Ghz E6600 to tackle that game but it still runs like a dog.

      • My E6600 runs it just fine. My guess is running it alongside something else that is resource heavy. Although I do run it in the lower quality setting.
    • Re:Euh, Atom 330? (Score:4, Informative)

      by PhrstBrn (751463) on Monday December 21, 2009 @07:23PM (#30518692)

      As the previous posted said, use Flash 10.1. The hardware acceleration makes a huge difference. Before using the "beta" version Flash was practically unusable.

      I have a Atom 330 with nVidia ION as well, and it can decode 720p H.264 video just fine (about 10-20% CPU usage in media player classic, or 30-40% with Flash). Haven't tried 1080p, but I'd suspect it works okay too. I'm using Win7, but I'd suspect that shouldn't make a difference.

      • Linux Flash 10.1 doesn't do hardware decoding, because Adobe is in their five-year LA LA LA LA stage when told that a commonly-used technology (64 bit, VDPAU) should be supported.

        That said, I got a Revo 3610 (Atom 330, tiny, ION chipset, wireless N, gige) and so far I'm quite happy with it. It's very quiet-- quieter than anything else in my house, anyway... And hardware support is good under Linux. Video playback with VLC/mplayer is fine. Youtube fullscreen is choppy: again, fuadobe. Come on, HTML5!

        I
        • by PhrstBrn (751463)

          I don't know how true or accurate this statement is, but Adobe claims no hardware acceleration on Linux is due to lack of standard API.

          In Flash Player 10.1, H.264 hardware acceleration is not supported under either Linux or Mac OS X. Linux currently lacks a developed standard API that supports H.264 hardware video decoding, and Mac OS X does not expose access to the required APIs. The Flash Player team will continue to evaluate adding hardware acceleration to Linux and Mac OS X in future releases.

          http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/fplayer10.1_hardware_acceleration_02.html

          Either Adobe is full of it (which wouldn't surprise me in the slightest), or somebody better start cracking that egg.

          I think the key to remember is not you may not be able to do it on linux (because you clearly can do hardware accelerated video decoding), but that the tools *may* not be

          • by GNious (953874)

            I don't know how true or accurate this statement is, but Adobe claims no hardware acceleration on Linux is due to lack of standard API.

            In Flash Player 10.1, H.264 hardware acceleration is not supported under either Linux or Mac OS X. Linux currently lacks a developed standard API that supports H.264 hardware video decoding, and Mac OS X does not expose access to the required APIs. The Flash Player team will continue to evaluate adding hardware acceleration to Linux and Mac OS X in future releases.

            On OSX, can this not be accomplished via OpenCL? And aren't similar solutions available on Linux??

          • by sowth (748135) *

            You might ask the mplayer guys. They seem to do hardware acceleration on Linux just fine. My guess is the single guy who ports to Linux is just incompetent. He can't even figure out ALSA [slashdot.org], and the fact that various helper libraries exist confuses him.

      • The main issue here is the new Atom is crippled, it is deliberately designed to keep the ION chipset at bay by doing a SOC design. There is no speed difference to its predecessors.
        So what we will see from that will be just another flood of new netbooks doing the old things, and less ION based ones (as if there were that many to begin with, Intel was rather successful to keep them away by outpricing NVidia by illegal means - they sold the GMA + Atom combination cheaper than Atom alone so NVidia was on a lost

    • by RuBLed (995686)
      Maybe you had a defective one. I bought one a month ago to replace an aging home desktop and installed Linux Mint on it. Works like charm for the family's surfing needs, Facebook works, flash games works, youtube works, everything aside from 3D games.

      What I noticed at first though that it would often lock up after 15 minutes or so and the screen would go corrupt. It was the know fan/heat issues on this one so I got myself a smaller casing (one made for Atom), bought a better GPU fan, replaced the thermal
    • by Kjella (173770)

      Meh, I run 1080p video just fine on my 330/Ion/Linux machine. It's just flash that sucks balls, and seems persistent in doing so. If flash was open source someone would have patched in VDPAU support long ago, for now we're left at the mercy of Adobe *shudder*. From what I've understood their hardware acceleration support is DXVA = Windows only even in the latest beta, they need to be take out back and shot 100 times as bad as IE6.

    • ...Flash games like Farmville on Facebook are unusable.

      So play Game! [wittyrpg.com] instead, no Flash!

    • An Ion based system can run a mythtv frontend with 1080p video and provide 1080i deinterlacing that is superior in quality to the software deinterlacing you can get off of a Core 2 Duo, and the Ion system does it with CPU >90% idle and about a 25 watt power draw for the whole system.

  • Although performance is no better, the new chip sips power. That will lead to longer life or cheaper batteries. Win.

  • I care a bit. A little bit.

    What I care more about, though, is if it can even come close to ARM CPUs in power per watt ratio. (Atom fanboys: First add the giant north bridge monster to your calculations before you answer. ^^)

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Sycraft-fu (314770)

      Well wonderful then, I'll just get an ARM netbook and run all my apps on it! What's that? My apps don't run on ARM? Well there you go then.

      ARM fanboy: The reason people like the atom is because it runs the massive amount of x86 OSes and apps out there. You can crow on about how much better your CPU is as much as you like, it doesn't make any difference when you are sitting there not running anything because it doesn't have a good base of software. There is some extreme usefulness is having binary compatibil

      • by jabjoe (1042100) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @02:52AM (#30521380)
        Fine, you stick with x86. But I'm looking forwards to the ARM netbooks, but I might wait for the A9 ones. I don't need massive about amount of CPU, just enough to play HD video comfortably. I don't need x86. ARM Linux runs what I'm running now, I can see it in the repositories. If there is something I really want that doesn't run on ARM, I'll look at porting it as a project. Which is part of the joy of open source and why so much is already cross platform. On both the netbook and desktop, you install software from the repository for, so binary compatibility doesn't matter.
      • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        This shit is modded up? It should be marked -1 Troll as that's what it is.

        Unlike you, some of us left the MS treadmill long ago so our apps run just fine on ARM. Many of the apps I use on my desktop Linux machine even work on Debian I have running in a bootstrap on my G1 cellphone. Just because you are locked in through your combination of fear/ignorance/laziness doesn't mean everyone else is too.

      • by rbanffy (584143)

        Well... My apps run on ARM. They run on x86, SPARC, MIPS and would run just the same on zSeries mainframes.

        If your apps don't run on the hardware you want, then, perhaps, they are not really your apps - they belong to their makers and you are just the person using them.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Kjella (173770)

      (Atom fanboys: First add the giant north bridge monster to your calculations before you answer. ^^)

      Perhaps the ARM fanboy should RTFA, since there is no more giant north bridge?

  • Look at the picture of this board. Unlike typical atom330+945gc nettop board it has NO FAN. And if we recall the fact that 945gc chipset consumes 25w of power, way more than 8w cpu itself, I would rather call this board "Nettop ATOM board done right, powerwise". So if you already have netbook which uses 945gse mobile chipset(which is already power efficient), this would mean nothing more than minor facelift. But if you're going to buy atom330+945gc itx nettop board, this is much improved product to consider

  • by IYagami (136831) on Tuesday December 22, 2009 @02:59AM (#30521404)

    The main benefit of the new Atom platform is its improved efficiency.

    More info at:

    Intel's next-gen Atom arrives in Asus' Eee PC 1005PE netbook
    http://techreport.com/articles.x/18167 [techreport.com]
    "Pine Trail's pseudo-system-on-chip architecture is quite a departure from the first Atom platform and an impressive achievement for Intel. Not only has the company managed to drop the number of chips and dramatically reduce the platform's footprint, but it has also lowered power consumption by a healthy margin. Those improvements should make it easier for manufacturers to churn out slimmer and lighter netbooks with better battery life than ever before."

    Intel Atom D510: Pine Trail Boosts Performance, Cuts Power
    http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3692 [anandtech.com]
    "First, new vs. old Atom. With a real world performance improvement approaching 10% on the desktop, I'm happy with the performance of Pine Trail. Short of Intel introducing a brand new architecture, Atom isn't going to get much better, so the fact that we're getting anything is worth being happy about.
    The impact of the on-die memory controller is noticeable on overall system performance. As I said earlier, my Pine Trail testbed was snappier and more responsive than my older Atom machines. It's by no means fast, but it's noticeably faster than before.
    Power consumption is also much improved thanks to Intel ditching the archaic 945 chipset. Although the impact on battery life in netbooks is going to be more exciting than drawing less power at the wall. Pine Trail is worth waiting for."

    ASUS Eee PC 1005PE: Pineview Arrives
    http://anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.aspx?i=3693 [anandtech.com]
    "The latest release of Atom brings quite a few changes, but the net result isn't quite as impressive as we were hoping. We have an integrated memory controller in the CPU along with a GPU on package. Those are cost saving measures that also provide some benefits in terms of power requirements. What they apparently don't provide is a significant improvement in performance. Anand saw around a 10% improvement in performance relative to Diamondville on the desktop, but the real problem is what we didn't get.
    Specifically, Pineview needed a lot more than GMA 3150 to make it attractive. Given a choice between N280 ION and N450 Pineview, ION will offer a better overall experience for the vast majority of users. If you want to do a silent HTPC, Pineview is going to need some form of external graphics, making the GMA 3150 a waste of space. We would have been much happier if Intel had included GMA 4500 instead, and even then it would be underpowered compared to ION."

The sooner all the animals are extinct, the sooner we'll find their money. - Ed Bluestone

Working...