Acer Aspire One (Gift for mom) Intel Atom or AMD Fusion?

[GlaceonX]

Well, the question is at the top....

I've always been rather curious at the supposively faster Intel Atom dual core counter part to the AMD Fusion Acer...

I own an AMD Fusion Aspire one, I can play crysis everything on low with it at veryvery good framerates..... Since this is a gift for mom, she only cares about responsiveness, speed of the OS etcetc, and she is an Intel lover but my AMD Aspire One is extremely responsive, speedy and etcetc....

I can't crack it thru her thick skull to just go for the AMD Acer, she thinks the 1.66ghz Intel Atom is faster than the 1ghz AMD Fusion (Both are dual cores)

Could you guys shed some light into this? I'm a pure AMD lover, but is the Intel counterpart of this netbook faster (In terms of procesor, not video performance) ?

 

[SpeedyGeek]

Just a few comments...

If your mom really wants speed, then you should be getting her a computer with SSD. As for CPUs, here is an example of a benchmark test page you can use to convince her one way or the other.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html

If I remember right AMD CPUs are more power efficient than Intels (don't quote me on this, because I can't remember for sure), and since you're getting a netbook and not a gaming machine...
EDIT: Forget what I said. I completely forgot about the new features of new Intel CPUs.

Honestly though, I wouldn't get a computer from Acer. They are one of more unreliable laptop computer producing companies.

 

[donavannj]

Technically, the Intel processor is a faster clock speed and therefore faster, but using an AMD has battery-life benefits, which are more of a concern with a netbook. You won't really notice much of a difference over the life of the machine.

 

[Archer]

Just a few comments...

If your mom really wants speed, then you should be getting her a computer with SSD. As for CPUs, here is an example of a benchmark test page you can use to convince her one way or the other.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html

If I remember right AMD CPUs are more power efficient than Intels (don't quote me on this, because I can't remember for sure), and since you're getting a netbook and not a gaming machine...

Honestly though, I wouldn't get a computer from Acer. They are one of more unreliable laptop computer producing companies.

Technically, the Intel processor is a faster clock speed and therefore faster, but using an AMD has battery-life benefits, which are more of a concern with a netbook. You won't really notice much of a difference over the life of the machine.

Dude, really? Megahertz myth. The Fusion is faster in single-threaded apps. (ie. most programs that one would find on a netbook) The Atom is faster in apps that use 3 or more threads, due to the hyperthreading. The graphics on the AMD are faster, as you know, but this isn't as irrelevant as you might think. More and more programs are using GPU acceleration. This means most video players (VLC, etc), even Youtube, as of Flash 10.2. Not only does this allow smoother performance during videos, as the CPU is free to move about, but it will help the battery life during videos. The battery of the Atom is going to be slightly better, but for the extra load on the CPU in videos or heavier applications, it will about even out.

I'd personally go with the AMD. They're not much different if she's not watching any videos, but you might as well support the underdog.

 

[SpeedyGeek]

Intel processor is a faster clock speed and therefore faster

Uh, no.

The Fusion is faster in single-threaded apps. (ie. most programs that one would find on a netbook) The Atom is faster in apps that use 3 or more threads, due to the hyperthreading.

I wouldn't generalize like that. It's true that Atom uses HT technology to its (dis)advantage, but there are bunch of other factors that go into computer performance too.

Ok... that said, there are bunch of other factors that go into computer's overall performance other than just CPU, so I would buy a computer that would give you the best bang for the buck based on overall performance, not just the brand of the CPU.

 

[Archer]

Uh, no.

I wouldn't generalize like that. It's true that Atom uses HT technology to its (dis)advantage, but there are bunch of other factors that go into computer performance too.

Ok... that said, there are bunch of other factors that go into computer's overall performance other than just CPU, so I would buy a computer that would give you the best bang for the buck based on overall performance, not just the brand of the CPU.

It wasn't a generalisation. It's the case in THIS scenario. Hyper-threading is SO important to the Atom's success bearable operation, due to the in-order operation. This becomes a little less important on the dual-core version, but still. On fully-fledged CPUs, the Hyperthreading makes much less difference.

You're right about considering the entire platform, but in this case, the CPUs are the bottlenecks. Plus they sort of define the rest of the platform.

 

[SpeedyGeek]

It wasn't a generalisation. It's the case in THIS scenario. Hyper-threading is SO important to the Atom's success bearable operation, due to the in-order operation. This becomes a little less important on the dual-core version, but still. On fully-fledged CPUs, the Hyperthreading makes much less difference.

You're right about considering the entire platform, but in this case, the CPUs are the bottlenecks. Plus they sort of define the rest of the platform.

Uh, no. A lot of software for netbooks can't even take full advantage of HT. The difference in speed from HT is EXTREMELY application dependent. We have no clue what it is that OP's mom plans to do with the netbook (heaven forbid it be gaming). Not to mention that most of the modern computers have their bottlenecks in hard drive & RAM. Slow RAM + slow HDD = slow computer. Doesn't matter if the CPU is i7.

You should read what I said again. I said best bang for the buck.