Can I ask a question? Something I always wondered at Anandtech.
When I flip from page to page in this review, the machines being compared in the charts are never the same. For example: The Macbook Pro is not included in the battery life charts but it's in the performance charts and display charts. But it's also never mentioned why the items in the charts vary from page to page..
I have noticed this in other articles as well. My first thought is that it would 1) skew the results too much to make the graph unreadable, or 2) the data is not available. But a more nefarious reason would be to cherry pick competitors to make the graph say what you want it to say.
The simple explanation for data missing from various reviews is that we either didn't have it, or we didn't choose to include it in a particular review for one reason or another. For laptops, if we've reviewed a laptop in the past, the usual reason it's not included is simply to avoid bloating the graphs. We have an "unofficial" decision to try to keep graphs to around 10 items to make them readable (at least for laptops). So, as we review new laptops we sort of arbitrarily remove older units from the charts. I try to keep relevant items in the charts, though, which is why the 5102 is there, along with single-core CULV, dual-core CULV, the i3-330UM UL80Jt, 1215N, 1001P, etc. -- basically one each (at least) of the various platforms.
As for how the charts are created, I do need to take some time at some point to make things easier. Right now, we use spreadsheets with results for the various laptops. I have netbook, entry, midrange, and high-end spreadsheets floating around -- multiple revisions of each. Vivek and Dustin have the same thing. So when it's time for a new article, I need to try to collate results from two or three spreadsheets, then add in the results for the test laptop. It's a bit of a pain, and that's why Vivek and Dustin often include different laptops in their reviews.
So now, after writing this, I think I'm going to go fool around with a database and see if I can make something that will handle all our needs better....
$700 for a dual core Atom netbook versus $1,000 for a Macbook Air 11.6" (base). It would be cool to see a comparison because the larger 13" Apple designs are targeting full-feature notebooks instead of ultraportable/ netbooks.
I think this netbook has the right idea w/ features. I also think it's $200 more than what it's base and configured prices should be. I wonder if there would still be a profit if they knocked $200 off the price.
"just in case you want to watch a 1080p H.264 movie on your 10.1” LCD" The article makes it seem like no one would want this. I had a portable DVD player that was smaller than this. I would like this feature. It's especially nice for on-the-go, or people who work at places that have a lot of downtime.
You can do 720p fine without the CrystalHD was sort of my point. Anyway, I'm not saying the ability is bad, but I'm saying the cost for that feature is too much. $100 to do a configurable model, and then $45 more for CrystalHD. I'd rather just get an NG-ION chip in there, or a CULV laptop instead.
I agree with this statement. While I don't have a problem with 1080p, I'm not sure why it's being pushed so hard. 720p is still acceptable, especially given the price differential as you mentioned.
While I somewhat understand the nature of the dimensions (small device + wide keyboard + 1080p for HD video), I still do not completely understand why this is the majority decision.
Still, great article, great product, just hopefully they'll find some way to knock the $$ down.
Exactly. I'd jump at the chance to have an 1215N over this netbook, simply for the fact the fact that it has ION it. I'm a little annoyed over the fact that it does hit on battery life, but really it doesn't impact on the battery life as much as I thought, cause my Toshiba Satellite iCore 3-eqipped has about roughly the same amount of battery life as the 1215N does, so I'm not really losing anything. BTW, the CULV laptops are very good in comparison, but I like the smaller footprint that these netbooks provide. Don't get me wrong, this machine is a sound machine with basic features, but there are better choices out there for the price. It's good to check around for prices on the net, who knows, you might find a good deal. This is my thoughts on this. - BLUEBOY
I'd love to see 768 vertical pixels become available on more netbooks, but if you can buy 3 other netbooks for the price of this one, a vendor has forgotten the definition of the word netbook.
Don't blame the dual-core CPU for inflating the price, the 1K unit price of the N550 is $22 more than N455.
This will be the marketplace failure it deserves to be.
CPU Bench is for desktop because those are able to run on a consistent platform. To do a mobile bench, we'd need all of the various mobile CPUs, and several laptops that allow us to switch out CPUs. Basically, comparing desktop and mobile CPUs is apples to oranges; both are fruit, but they're not in the same family. We don't have server chips in bench either, for the same reasons.
Of course, we would like to put together a mobile version of bench, but we haven't yet hashed out how to best accomplish that task.
"we also expect to see them jump on the Brazos bandwagon next year. That could mean improved performance in every area relative to Atom, hopefully without sacrificing battery life."
Your hope won't be fulfilled. And the reason is very very simple.
The faster Brazos, Zacate (1,6GHz), has a TDP of 18 W. This model beats by 10-20 % the double-core N550 and 8,5 W TDP Atom. Of course, the graphics performance is in a class of its own. But the key words here are 18W vs 8,5W.
The slower Brazos, Ontario (1,0GHz), has a TDP of 9 W. But this chip should end up being slower than aforementioned Atom.
Well, there's more to battery life than the TDP of processor/chipset combo, and there's more to a computer than it's battery life. A good computer is all about balance, and AMD is betting that Brazos based netbooks will be more balanced than Atom ones. That said, if battery life is bad enough, it will be a problem. We'll find out soon.
very very soon, since HP will anounce mini notebook within a few days with brazos at CES.
Indeed TDP doesn't mean anything at all. Preview of anandtech already showed that together with other review sites. Single threaded perf will be much better on brazos then this one, multi not. GPU is a no brainer and not even to be mentioned for comparisson :)
Assuming linear scaling and looking at the cinebench numbers (the only bench that was obviously single threaded) the 1.2ghz, 9W brazos will be 20-25% faster than an atom. The atoms will still have an edge in multi-threaded apps; but where windows netbooks hurt the worst is in single threaded UIs, so AMD could have a winner here in general usability even if Intel managed to win more total benchmarks.
Thus you can't compare the tdps and find out battery life. First tdp is worst case scenario, for the worst chips at the hottest time, it isn't the the average full load power consumption. Furthermore you can't establish the average power consumption of an item just by knowing the maximum power consumption, you need to know the idle power consumption and how long the item is in the different power consumptions states.
The SU2300 has a tdp of 10w, the Ion Chipset (first gen) has a tdp of 12w or so. So total tdp is about 22 watts. If we compare it to the Zacate/Brazos which has a tdp of 18w, using your logic we assume the tdp should only be about 4 watts apart. But what is obtained in reality is a difference of 9 to 12 watts depending on whether the system is on idle, load (cinemark), or load (gaming).
Or put another way the d510 has a tdp of 13w the chipsett has a tdp of 2w thus total tdp is 15w. It should have a lower power consumption than the zacate system if you were just looking at tdp. Yet the Zacate/Brazos system beats it at idle power consumption, load power consumption on cinemark but the Zacate/Brazos system uses more power when load gaming.
You guys try despirately convince that 18W TDP Zacate has lower power consumption than 8,5W TDP Atom. Good luck with that, I don't buy it.
AMD does partially very sloppy work here 'cause even the single core Zacate has 18W TDP.
Surely one can argue around the subject but me being owned? My ass.
When comparing double core 9W TDP Ontario at 1 GHz and double core 8,5W TDP Atom at 1,5 GHz the winner in power consumpion can actually go either way. I don't actually make any statement in my first post concerning power consumption but simple make an edjucated guess that Atom might end up being faster. Surely one can argue here what ever he wants but me owned here? My ass.
Here again AMD does partially sloppy work with this new chip 'cause even the single core Ontario has TDP of 9W. Single core Atom has 6,5W TDP. The difference in TDPs is so significant that real life power consumption win can easely go to Atom. Again this surely can be debated over but me being owned? My ass.
Comparing the Atom D510 to the Brazos E-350, AMD wins pretty much every meaningful test on the CPU side. That's a dual-core 1.6GHz beating the dual-core + Hyper-Threading 1.66GHz. The best result is in the single-threaded Cinebench test, where E-350 wins by 65%. Cut the clock speed down to 1.0GHz (or 1.2GHz single-core) and it should still be able to compete. I suppose the N550 looked at in this article will come out ahead on quite a few benchmarks relative to the netbook AMD parts, but only on the CPU side.
The other factor is the GPU, which is the wild card. These are still not gaming systems, but Brazos ought to be able to do HD Flash (and other HD content) where Atom on its own cannot. Unless there's a huge performance deficit (i.e. more than 30%), we'll be looking at really slow Atom vs. slightly slower Brazos on the CPU side. We'll also have okay Brazos vs. completely pathetic GMA 3150 on the GPU side. The question will then become pricing as well, because if Brazos netbooks end up at $450, you can simply get Atom + NG-ION to effectively get around the GPU argument.
I do have to admit that my "hopefully" is probably optimistic, but until I have final hardware I won't call the battle won or lost by AMD. I do think that the Bobcat architecture has some potential to win the netbook/nettop contest with some tweaks, but at the current specs it doesn't look like it will happen. Instead of getting the equivalent of CULV + decent IGP at netbook pricing, we'll get Atom + decent IGP at higher than basic netbook pricing.
I'd like to emphasize here that I took stand to the battery life in the first place. Just like the headline above tells.
1. Zacate, the 18W TDP part of Brazos, won't beat 8,5W TDP Atom in battery life. This is my original statement and what I really wanted to point out. Obviously I don't have hard evidence on that but I absolutely stick to my statement anyway.
2. Ontario, the 9W TDP part of Brazos, will or will not beat the aforementioned Atom in battery life. I simply didn't take any stand here either way. Instead I pointed out that here Atom will probably win the speed contest. All the time I referred to the double core models since that's what was tested in the article. And yes, I was talking about the CPUs. And just because of that I also stated that Brazos' graphics are superior. But this is just some sort of a foot note 'cause my point being the battery life (and also the performance aspect couldn't been totally overlooked since you said this: <em>"That could mean improved performance in every area relative to Atom, hopefully without sacrificing battery life"</em>.
Further more, one can raise doubts that even in single core models Atom will win the battery life contest over Brazos. Zacate will lose, that's for sure. Ontario has a good chance to lose but this remains to be seen.
I also think like you that AMD can and will win some design wins here, the graphic performance being that good. And especially when the price plays in. But that's another story.
Its almost a scam. I have a asus dual core atom netbook(selling on ebay) The performance is only SLIGHTLY faster than single core atoms I wanted something portable but the loss in performance is completely frustrating Ended up buying a thinkpad x201, yes its more expensive but I got protability with power
...And the ship of sanity sails yet further away into the horizon. At what point does this absurdity become apparent to everyone? $1200? $2500? Hell HP should market a $10,000 crappy atom netbook just to see how many true suckers there are out there. I for one would like to know once and for all. Never mind that a K125 netbook costs $300 and can outdo this thing in every measurable category.
So why dont we have more AMD design wins? I hope everyone understands why by now. It is because the guys who make the decisions on what chips to use.... well you know they all own 50 times as much Intel stock as they do AMD (if they own any AMD at all). That's because Intel is a DOW component. So if they have any money then chances are part of it is invested in Intel. So of course they're going to use Intel parts for the majority of designs, regardless of how craptastic they are. A $45 crystal HD decoder? Can I get a WTF? What kind of idiotic hare brained pipe dream hackjob solution is that? I bet broadcom execs bribed intel execs to make NM10 especially crappy just so Broadcom could sell a bunch of junk chips that dont even work right. Does an AMD chipset even cost that much?
Who decided that it somehow makes sense to waste $45 on a crackheaded patchjob HD video solution when they could just use an AMD chipset, which is cheaper anyway, and then dump that $45 into a larger battery?
HP has the 11.6" dm1z Nile netbook. It's without a doubt the best netbook as far as performance is concerned, and not much bigger or heavier than a 10" Mini 210.
I'm actually surprised why HP hasn't made an enterprise 11.6" netbook. I would love to see the Nile platform inside a chassis like the 5103.
okay. Jarred, do you really think this keyboard is "the best 10” keyboard I’ve ever used". I had a HP Mini 210, not 5103, but something that has the exact same keyboard. it is easily the WORST keyboard i have used (i give it to my cousin the second day because of it). and it has nothing to do with the keyboard built. it has to do with stupid keys themselves. and i simply cannot understand why this review doesn't even mention this gigantic flaw (unless they changed it in 5103, which i doubt)
the smart HP engineers thought no one use F keys, as a result, the secondary function of "F" keys are swapped with the primary function. confusing? let me give you an example.
say you want to close a program by ctrl + F4, perform a search by pressing F3, refresh website using F5, or go to address bar using F6, or full screen using F11. you cannot do it. you have to press fn + F keys to do. i mean, unless you are totally newb who doesn't use any shortcut keys, this laptop is simply unusable. to close an application i now have to press fn+ctrl+f4. some more complicated actions such as print word doc ("Ctrl + Shift + F12") now is unachievable thanks to this stupid keyboard.
NOW. as i learned later on there is a way to solve it, and that is going to BIOS. but why doesn't HP make it default? and not every computer you use will give you the access to BIOS. and how many end user actually know this trick? all in all, giant flaw, i repeat. GIANT FLAW.
I don't know about the 210, but I did try the Mini 311 and it's definitely not the same keyboard. Also, as you mention you can switch the functionality of the F keys in the BIOS, which is something I did almost immediately. Dell and a few others have tried the same thing for some reason... blame silly UI consultants. That said, the "best 10" keyboard" is still a far cry from a good 13.3" keyboard. :-)
Its a reason I don't like Microsoft keyboards as the default settings for F-function are swapped for something else "Launch Word" "Launch Browser" etc. So after every time you boot up, you have to press the F-Lock key to turn on Normal F-Keys.
I think the big-boys have done market research and found that most of todays users, especially younger generation, don't really make much use of F-Keys. Look at the ChromeOS netbooks for example... even doing away with the CAPS-Lock (which is understandable, if they simply make Holding the SHIFT key for a second turned it into a lock).
$688 for a netbook is obscene. I don't care what freakin' market you're in for a portable PC or what "selection of features" you're looking for. Anyone stupid enough to spend that kind of money on a freakin' netbook deserves to be a victim of a Justin Bieber concert teenage girl stampede.
The quality of the build and the multi-touch screen doesn't make it worth $688~700, thats the point.
An iPad starts at $500 and is more functional and easily better built. A 3G iPad starts at about $600. Hence, Apple's tablet has destroyed the netbook market over night...
The point of netbooks was a cheap and light-weight tool access the internet, they were NEVER designed to be your main-computer, even thou they are easily more powerful than the notebooks/desktops from 2001. And for $250~300, they *DO* make good kid computers (5~8) with their small keyboard.
The iPad make everything a lot easier. Hopefully we'll see even more tablet devices for the $300~500 range that are built well. Check out the enTourage - eDGe Dual Book, its about $500 and has both a B&W "paper" display for ebooks and a color multi-touch. And yes, neither of these devices replace a full size notebook.
I have to *strongly* disagree with several of your assertions. First, to just go and state that the "iPad is built better" is completely glossing over many things. It's got a better display, and better touch capabilities, but total storage, memory, expansion options, and other features aren't better at all. I can't even tell you how silly it is to pretend typing on the iPad is a good experience... even with the addition of the keyboard dock, it's not something I would enjoy.
In terms of pure performance potential, Atom N550 is WAY ahead of the iPad processor; it's not even close. In fact, even Atom N450 is way ahead of the iPad CPU. ARM processors of any form are a big step down in performance from even Atom, but they also use a lot less power. But there's more to it than raw performance (see below).
Another part of the equation is that the iPad sports a pretty decent GPU, all things considered. GMA 3150 is a joke, but I suspect the next generation Atom will improve that area. But a slow CPU with a moderate GPU can be made to work really well when you combine the final piece of the puzzle, and that piece is the OS.
iPad runs iOS, which is tailor made for the CPU + GPU + RAM combination that iPhone and iPad offer. Windows 7 works on Atom, but it isn't even remotely ideal. This is why I tried running Chrome OS on the 5103 to see what would happen. Even though the build I tried wasn't a great success, when we see the final Chrome laptops I think it could be a greatly improved experience. I'd still rather see something more like Android than basing everything out of the browser. When I boot up Chrome OS and launch into the browser, I'd rather see something like your typical smartphone layout.
Why isn't anyone trying netbook-oriented Linux distros anymore?
I bet a lightweight Linux OS would absolutely fly on this thing!
I just recently put Ubuntu Netbook Edition on an old eee PC 900HD and it is at least twice as fast as it was running Windows XP. And the UBE UI design is somewhere between a smartphone and proper desktop Ubuntu, it really works nicely on these small computers.
My partner will soon be trading Windows 7 Starter for Ubuntu Netbook Edition on her Samsung N150.
I understand why Windows gained dominance on the netbook, but I wish it hadn't. Trying to run Windows on these things is what contributes to most folks' misconceptions about their capabilities. A netbook is perfectly capable of being a primary computer for people without extravagant needs--but only if the OS is tailored to the platform. Windows just isn't designed for these things.
I happen to have bought the Asus1215N-PU17 12-inch netbook in early October 2010. A great product, imho....
$484 on Amazon.
For that price, it comes with:- D525 1.8GHz dual-core Atom 2GB Ram Win7 Home Premium GT218 nVidia GPU with Optimus fully functional. ( Zero problem with Bluray playback from an external BluRay drive either to the netbook screen or to a HDMI-connected 1080p display. WoW is very playable at medium resolution.) Superb Wi-Fi sensitivity 1366x768 display 6-cell 56Wh battery Typical 5-6hr battery "life"
Why anybody would pay any extra for a HP laptop or netbook today is totally beyond me.... Compared to other major manufacturers, the HP name means absolutely nothing today in terms of product support and HP's bloatware is probably the worst of any PC supplier.
I have sadly become closely familiar with HP's "wonderful" product support, having purchased a couple of HP laptops for family members, one 4 years ago and one 2 years ago. In the case of the 4-year old machine, there was a systematic motherboard failure in this particular model that results in the Wi-Fi first becoming inoperative, followed by other symptoms such as erratic loss of video. HP did issue a recall for a complete motherboard replacement about 2 years ago , but would only accept machines IN WHICH THE WI-FI ACTUALLY FAILED and BEFORE A SPECIFIC CUT-OFF DATE around mid-2009. Well, the Wi-Fi in our machine became inoperative in early 2010.... and the video started very occasionally but randomly blanking 3 months ago.The machine now bears a close resemblance to a door-stop... it cannot be trusted ever again. "Hard luck" says HP.. "the recall period has expired... only a $400 (or more) repair...." There was a time when a HP warrantly meant 100% lifetime support for ANY manufacturing defects discovered after shipment. That time is long since gone... it went when Carly Fiorino arrived at HP, it went with all the layoffs and the bottom-line focus....
The seconf HP machine I bought 2 years is still working fine, but I am keeping a close eye on product recalls...
Personally, this is why I would never buy a consumer desktop offering from most OEMs. It's also one of my major concerns with laptops. Lucky for me I can use any one of a number of laptops, and I'm able to frequently move between models, but if I had to buy my own laptop I'd almost certainly get a business offering. They're usually made to last, come with better support, and don't go with the silly consumer fads. Unfortunately, they also cost a lot more and it's still tough to find a good LCD.
I'm not a Mac user... but this is why Apple does very well...
Apple would NOT come out with a product that is such a POOR user experience (not the same as defective yellow LCD screens on iMacs) - in which things DON'T work the way they should.
Really? $700 for this thing? For $525 or so, a person can pick up a 14" Thinkpad Edige which has about a 4hour battery and a far more powerful dual core CPU. Hitting about $700 - and you start hitting close to a bottom line $850 Thinkpad T410 series.
Of course, anyone can pick up any 15" wal-mart class bottom end notebook for about $400~500 with a more powerful CPU... yes yes, its not 2-3lbs with a decent battery....
netbooks work at the market with a $250~350 price range, anything more - a person should just get a normal notebook or a high end thin-notebook.
"The second issue with the touchscreen interface is precision. Tapping on the screen to “click” often misses your intended target, and the same goes for dragging, selecting text, etc. With a UI build around touch, this could be alleviated, but the standard Windows UI isn’t sufficient. A mouse is a highly precise pointer that targets a single pixel; replacing that with your stubby fingertip that covers perhaps hundreds of pixels and then trying to determine where you clicked is difficult at best, and the result left me wanting"
Ok, I've owned a Latitude XT and XT2, Acer 1820ptz and 'even', an Archos 9. They all had one thing in common... an SSD drive fitted by me and a re-install of windows 7. I obviously did a small amount of tweaking, Windows search turned off etc.
I then CALIBRATED the touch option. I then changed the Display DPI to 125%.
Why can't reviewers MENTION these things instead of bashing something that, in all honesty, if perfectly fine, acceptable, easy to use as Windows touch? Baffles me
Right. It would be great if Windows' calibrate option actually made things better. It works *okay*, but running the calibration tool (where you click on the crosshairs in the corners of the display) made things worse when I tried it. Maybe it's just this particular display/netbook, with a 1/8" ridge around the panel that makes targeting the edges difficult? As someone who uses an iPod Touch regularly I can say for certain that it's nowhere near as pleasant an experience. I've gone into the Windows Pen options, and there's nothing in there that I've tried that made the precision better.
To better explain my complaint, if you're trying to "click" on a large button, the interface works well. Clicking on small targets is where you run into difficulties -- like say I misspell a word like "caibrate" and I want to go back and click in between the "a" and the "i" to insert the missing "l". Yes, you can do it, but it will often require several tries to get the cursor right where I want it. (And for the record, the iOS "magnifier" tool that helps you position the cursor feels equally clunky.)
But that's just one example; tapping on a hyperlink on a webpage when there are two close together is imprecise and you might get the top link when you were aiming for the bottom, or vice versa. There are radio buttons and check boxes where you'll "miss" because you didn't click right where the program wanted to.
Changing the DPI can help in some instances, and do nothing in others. An SSD will help speed up some things as well, but it certainly won't make Flash suddenly run smooth as butter. To pretend that such things are a panacea is disingenuous. To imply that "I'm doing it wrong" just because I don't like the way it works is just as good as Steve Jobs' comments on antenna-gate.
I've used a pen-based device before and that was better than using my finger on this netbook, but it still wasn't perfect. So far, every touch interface I've tried with Windows has worked fine for some things but not as well for others. It's a lot like the TrackPoint and Touchpad compared to a mouse; some people love the experience and others don't. But trust me when I say that I've done plenty of optimizations to make this netbook run about as well as it possibly can (i.e. disabling nearly all of the HP utilities and software, turning off Windows services that aren't necessary, defragging the hard drive, etc.) It's still sluggish and could benefit from an OS and UI optimized for netbooks and touch rather than a full copy of Win7.
damianrobertjones writes: "Why can't reviewers MENTION these things [SSD, Win7 reinstall, OS tweaks, recalibrate touch, search turned off] instead of bashing something that, in all honesty, if perfectly fine, acceptable, easy to use as Windows touch? Baffles me"
You may as well ask why some Chevy econobox isn't higher rated considering how fast it would go with suspension and engine work.
Why ever should a buyer be expected to do those things, and why should AT evaluate a product on that basis? Baffles me...
P.s. Having the APple macbook pro at the top of nearly every chart will probably take sales away from the other oem's. I bet they cannot be pleased by this!
ULV processors compete in the same power space, at least in theory, and Apple manages substantially better battery life (under OS X at least), plus we wanted to show some other IGP solutions.
You do realize that in terms of performance, the Toshiba T235D is the exact laptop configuration you're requesting? Sure, the HP build quality and other aspects would be different, but the performance should be unchanged (K625 dual-core plus HD 4225).
HP can have a wild sense of humor, and 700 bucks for "this" proves it. And the Atom, well, I remember the fact that the old Celeron ULV (fully-clocked) used on the first models of the EeePC could beat the crap out of the Atom. It doesn't matter if it had a revision or if it's a dual core now: It's the same lousy chip. Intel couldn't use it in MIDs because MIDs were a fail. And they can't use it on a phone because it's still too hot and inefficient. ET's cartridges were dumped in the desert. Well, netbooks are the "desert" were Intel can dump the Atoms, and make money in the process.
I've owned the similiar HP Mini 210-2000 since October, and it is much better than the 5103 for about $200 less It has the N550 dual-core CPU, 2GB DDR3 RAM, 250 GB 7200 rpm HD, 802.11n, BT, 6-cell 72wh battery (no protruding bump), 1366x720 display, Intel 3150 GMA with Crystal HD video accellerator (onboard chip), Windows 7 Home Premium-32 bit. Build quality is excellent, no problem with HD playback, and bettery life is more than 7 hours (rated 10+).,and good chicklet keyboard. Base price was $329,as configured $510..
Every single time.. without fail... come the few who have to proclaim... spluttering.. that netbooks are not powerful enough, blah blah.
I own about a half dozen pc's, laptops and a netbook.
The netbook is not as powerful as the pc's or the laptops
Its not supposed to be
I use it for browsing the internet oh and watching some NON-HD videos.. and when I am on the couch watching tv to order some xmas present.. and when I am out in the sunshine and when I am on the train on a 5 hour journey.. in fact I've ended up using it more than the other pc's put together
Because..
its small, light, portable, cheap and has a long battery..
My desktop and laptops do not have ANY of these features
If you are a gaming enthusiast and cannot deal with the fact that a 300 euro netbook cannot play GTA4 at the highest settings, or that you can't watch your HD videos while running a virus check while running 3Dmark06.. then.. don't.. get... one.
Small, light, portable, long battery life - try to understand.. jesus
instead of spending money on laptop/desktop/netbook and what have you, and only uses 1/4 of your investment every time, you could simply buy a ultra portable, and use your investment 100% of time. (not to mention the hassle of migrate files, sync folder and what not).
my x201 tablet weights about 3 lbs, 7 hr battery life, i7 core, ssd and IPS. small, light, portable (very portable because it is a tablet), and process 1080p flash and still have 60% of cpu power to do other stuff.
sure it is costly on the paper (about 10 time more expensive than my HP Mini 210), but i use it 100% of time.
I disagree with netbooks being portable. They're more portable, but when I had a netbook and a desktop compared to having just a full-size laptop, I used my netbook no more often than I use my laptop now. It was not any easier to quickly check something, because I still had to boot it... wait for the OS to start... be near a wifi connection... etc.
I just got a Dell Latitude E4200 from their Outlet for $690 after tax. That includes the following:
SU9600 processor 2GB RAM 12.1" 1200x800 matte display with full-size keyboard 64GB SSD and external eSATA DVD writer Six-cell battery
The HP netbook is pretty cool if you want new, but I got a 3-year warranty with the Latitude, but when I can get a $1700 ultraportable as a certified-refurb for about the same as the HP, and it performs faster and has superior construction quality (not that the HP is bad, just the Latitude is killer), then the Latitude wins. I was also able to easily add a WWAN card after the fact.
Still, HP is moving in the right direction with this. I hope more vendors will do so.
Atom has been on the market for almost three years now, and despite this fact, no significant advances have been made in power efficiency or performance.
Compare the Atom 330, which came out in mid 2008 to the N550, reviewed today. Their power draw is about the same (8.5W versus 8W), and their performance and clockspeed is about the same (1.6GHz versus 1.5GHz).
Atom was underpowered when it was released, but fast enough to be useful. Today, performance is about the same, but the demands placed on it are higher. The end result is that Atom just gets worse and worse.
The only problem with your post is that the Atom 330 didn't have SpeedStep, it didn't have an IGP, and it didn't have DDR3 support. We looked at the ASUS 1201N way back in the day with Atom 330 + ION, and because of the lack of SpeedStep the battery life was about half of what you can now do with the N550. But the rest of what you say is true, and I really hope the next Atom revision does more to improve the status of netbooks.
I'm afraid it won't, because Intel has already spent a great deal of time badmouthing netbooks as primary computing devices. They don't want netbooks to compete with their more expensive mobile processor lines. Hell, this is why they killed the SU2300 in the first place; because Acer was selling Aspire 1410s with that chip for $400 and it was selling like hotcakes, scarcely slower than the more expensive CULV chips!
I'm not so sure about your "simple math", rarson. The 5103 has a 29Wh battery, not a 66Wh battery (that upgrade is available, but it's not what I tested).
Based on the figures in my review, at idle the Mini 5103 uses just 6.8W total. In the Internet test it uses 9.0W, and in the x264 test (the "worst case" scenario) it hits 12.9W. Of course, those are all on battery power, and I'd assume there's some inefficiency in getting power out of the battery and into the system.
As a secondary test, I just plugged the Mini 5103 into a Kill-A-Watt device to test power draw. Power adapter efficiency certainly comes into play in this test, and if it's 80% efficient (reasonable) the actual power draw is pretty close to the above calculations. Idle: 10W x264 playback: 13.5W Cinebench SMP: 15W
So, again, TDP doesn't necessarily tell you a whole lot. Idle power requirements are much lower than TDP, and even heavy use will rarely hit TDP on everything, so you can't just add CPU, chipset, HDD, etc. TDPs to figure out how much power a system will actually use.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
57 Comments
Back to Article
puffpio - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
Can I ask a question? Something I always wondered at Anandtech.When I flip from page to page in this review, the machines being compared in the charts are never the same. For example: The Macbook Pro is not included in the battery life charts but it's in the performance charts and display charts. But it's also never mentioned why the items in the charts vary from page to page..
I have noticed this in other articles as well. My first thought is that it would 1) skew the results too much to make the graph unreadable, or 2) the data is not available. But a more nefarious reason would be to cherry pick competitors to make the graph say what you want it to say.
Thanks for any insight
Stuka87 - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
Hmm, I see the Apple MacBook Pro 13 in all the battery results?JarredWalton - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
The simple explanation for data missing from various reviews is that we either didn't have it, or we didn't choose to include it in a particular review for one reason or another. For laptops, if we've reviewed a laptop in the past, the usual reason it's not included is simply to avoid bloating the graphs. We have an "unofficial" decision to try to keep graphs to around 10 items to make them readable (at least for laptops). So, as we review new laptops we sort of arbitrarily remove older units from the charts. I try to keep relevant items in the charts, though, which is why the 5102 is there, along with single-core CULV, dual-core CULV, the i3-330UM UL80Jt, 1215N, 1001P, etc. -- basically one each (at least) of the various platforms.As for how the charts are created, I do need to take some time at some point to make things easier. Right now, we use spreadsheets with results for the various laptops. I have netbook, entry, midrange, and high-end spreadsheets floating around -- multiple revisions of each. Vivek and Dustin have the same thing. So when it's time for a new article, I need to try to collate results from two or three spreadsheets, then add in the results for the test laptop. It's a bit of a pain, and that's why Vivek and Dustin often include different laptops in their reviews.
So now, after writing this, I think I'm going to go fool around with a database and see if I can make something that will handle all our needs better....
pjkenned - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
$700 for a dual core Atom netbook versus $1,000 for a Macbook Air 11.6" (base). It would be cool to see a comparison because the larger 13" Apple designs are targeting full-feature notebooks instead of ultraportable/ netbooks.vol7ron - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
I think this netbook has the right idea w/ features. I also think it's $200 more than what it's base and configured prices should be. I wonder if there would still be a profit if they knocked $200 off the price."just in case you want to watch a 1080p H.264 movie on your 10.1” LCD"
The article makes it seem like no one would want this. I had a portable DVD player that was smaller than this. I would like this feature. It's especially nice for on-the-go, or people who work at places that have a lot of downtime.
JarredWalton - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
You can do 720p fine without the CrystalHD was sort of my point. Anyway, I'm not saying the ability is bad, but I'm saying the cost for that feature is too much. $100 to do a configurable model, and then $45 more for CrystalHD. I'd rather just get an NG-ION chip in there, or a CULV laptop instead.vol7ron - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
I agree with this statement. While I don't have a problem with 1080p, I'm not sure why it's being pushed so hard. 720p is still acceptable, especially given the price differential as you mentioned.While I somewhat understand the nature of the dimensions (small device + wide keyboard + 1080p for HD video), I still do not completely understand why this is the majority decision.
Still, great article, great product, just hopefully they'll find some way to knock the $$ down.
blueboy_10 - Thursday, December 23, 2010 - link
Exactly. I'd jump at the chance to have an 1215N over this netbook, simply for the fact the fact that it has ION it. I'm a little annoyed over the fact that it does hit on battery life, but really it doesn't impact on the battery life as much as I thought, cause my Toshiba Satellite iCore 3-eqipped has about roughly the same amount of battery life as the 1215N does, so I'm not really losing anything. BTW, the CULV laptops are very good in comparison, but I like the smaller footprint that these netbooks provide. Don't get me wrong, this machine is a sound machine with basic features, but there are better choices out there for the price. It's good to check around for prices on the net, who knows, you might find a good deal. This is my thoughts on this. - BLUEBOYTaft12 - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
I'd love to see 768 vertical pixels become available on more netbooks, but if you can buy 3 other netbooks for the price of this one, a vendor has forgotten the definition of the word netbook.Don't blame the dual-core CPU for inflating the price, the 1K unit price of the N550 is $22 more than N455.
This will be the marketplace failure it deserves to be.
mino - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
On another note, why are there exactly zero SoC Atom's in Bench?Also, why do you generally not include mobile CPU's in Bench?
I mean, what are 10 flavors of Athlon II X2 good for with no numbers for e.g. K625 ?
Same goes for i* stuff.
JarredWalton - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
CPU Bench is for desktop because those are able to run on a consistent platform. To do a mobile bench, we'd need all of the various mobile CPUs, and several laptops that allow us to switch out CPUs. Basically, comparing desktop and mobile CPUs is apples to oranges; both are fruit, but they're not in the same family. We don't have server chips in bench either, for the same reasons.Of course, we would like to put together a mobile version of bench, but we haven't yet hashed out how to best accomplish that task.
rundll - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
"we also expect to see them jump on the Brazos bandwagon next year. That could mean improved performance in every area relative to Atom, hopefully without sacrificing battery life."Your hope won't be fulfilled. And the reason is very very simple.
The faster Brazos, Zacate (1,6GHz), has a TDP of 18 W. This model beats by 10-20 % the double-core N550 and 8,5 W TDP Atom. Of course, the graphics performance is in a class of its own. But the key words here are 18W vs 8,5W.
The slower Brazos, Ontario (1,0GHz), has a TDP of 9 W. But this chip should end up being slower than aforementioned Atom.
nafhan - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
Well, there's more to battery life than the TDP of processor/chipset combo, and there's more to a computer than it's battery life. A good computer is all about balance, and AMD is betting that Brazos based netbooks will be more balanced than Atom ones. That said, if battery life is bad enough, it will be a problem. We'll find out soon.duploxxx - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
very very soon, since HP will anounce mini notebook within a few days with brazos at CES.Indeed TDP doesn't mean anything at all. Preview of anandtech already showed that together with other review sites. Single threaded perf will be much better on brazos then this one, multi not. GPU is a no brainer and not even to be mentioned for comparisson :)
DanNeely - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
Assuming linear scaling and looking at the cinebench numbers (the only bench that was obviously single threaded) the 1.2ghz, 9W brazos will be 20-25% faster than an atom. The atoms will still have an edge in multi-threaded apps; but where windows netbooks hurt the worst is in single threaded UIs, so AMD could have a winner here in general usability even if Intel managed to win more total benchmarks.Roland00Address - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
Thus you can't compare the tdps and find out battery life. First tdp is worst case scenario, for the worst chips at the hottest time, it isn't the the average full load power consumption. Furthermore you can't establish the average power consumption of an item just by knowing the maximum power consumption, you need to know the idle power consumption and how long the item is in the different power consumptions states.For example see below link
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=1039&type...
The SU2300 has a tdp of 10w, the Ion Chipset (first gen) has a tdp of 12w or so. So total tdp is about 22 watts. If we compare it to the Zacate/Brazos which has a tdp of 18w, using your logic we assume the tdp should only be about 4 watts apart. But what is obtained in reality is a difference of 9 to 12 watts depending on whether the system is on idle, load (cinemark), or load (gaming).
Or put another way the d510 has a tdp of 13w the chipsett has a tdp of 2w thus total tdp is 15w. It should have a lower power consumption than the zacate system if you were just looking at tdp. Yet the Zacate/Brazos system beats it at idle power consumption, load power consumption on cinemark but the Zacate/Brazos system uses more power when load gaming.
Taft12 - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
Wow, properly owned several times. I guess you'll never mistake TDP for actual system power consumption again.rundll - Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - link
Owned? My ass.You guys try despirately convince that 18W TDP Zacate has lower power consumption than 8,5W TDP Atom. Good luck with that, I don't buy it.
AMD does partially very sloppy work here 'cause even the single core Zacate has 18W TDP.
Surely one can argue around the subject but me being owned? My ass.
When comparing double core 9W TDP Ontario at 1 GHz and double core 8,5W TDP Atom at 1,5 GHz the winner in power consumpion can actually go either way. I don't actually make any statement in my first post concerning power consumption but simple make an edjucated guess that Atom might end up being faster. Surely one can argue here what ever he wants but me owned here? My ass.
Here again AMD does partially sloppy work with this new chip 'cause even the single core Ontario has TDP of 9W. Single core Atom has 6,5W TDP. The difference in TDPs is so significant that real life power consumption win can easely go to Atom.
Again this surely can be debated over but me being owned? My ass.
JarredWalton - Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - link
So going off of this:http://www.anandtech.com/show/4023/the-brazos-perf...
Comparing the Atom D510 to the Brazos E-350, AMD wins pretty much every meaningful test on the CPU side. That's a dual-core 1.6GHz beating the dual-core + Hyper-Threading 1.66GHz. The best result is in the single-threaded Cinebench test, where E-350 wins by 65%. Cut the clock speed down to 1.0GHz (or 1.2GHz single-core) and it should still be able to compete. I suppose the N550 looked at in this article will come out ahead on quite a few benchmarks relative to the netbook AMD parts, but only on the CPU side.
The other factor is the GPU, which is the wild card. These are still not gaming systems, but Brazos ought to be able to do HD Flash (and other HD content) where Atom on its own cannot. Unless there's a huge performance deficit (i.e. more than 30%), we'll be looking at really slow Atom vs. slightly slower Brazos on the CPU side. We'll also have okay Brazos vs. completely pathetic GMA 3150 on the GPU side. The question will then become pricing as well, because if Brazos netbooks end up at $450, you can simply get Atom + NG-ION to effectively get around the GPU argument.
I do have to admit that my "hopefully" is probably optimistic, but until I have final hardware I won't call the battle won or lost by AMD. I do think that the Bobcat architecture has some potential to win the netbook/nettop contest with some tweaks, but at the current specs it doesn't look like it will happen. Instead of getting the equivalent of CULV + decent IGP at netbook pricing, we'll get Atom + decent IGP at higher than basic netbook pricing.
rundll - Tuesday, December 21, 2010 - link
I'd like to emphasize here that I took stand to the battery life in the first place. Just like the headline above tells.1. Zacate, the 18W TDP part of Brazos, won't beat 8,5W TDP Atom in battery life. This is my original statement and what I really wanted to point out. Obviously I don't have hard evidence on that but I absolutely stick to my statement anyway.
2. Ontario, the 9W TDP part of Brazos, will or will not beat the aforementioned Atom in battery life. I simply didn't take any stand here either way. Instead I pointed out that here Atom will probably win the speed contest.
All the time I referred to the double core models since that's what was tested in the article. And yes, I was talking about the CPUs. And just because of that I also stated that Brazos' graphics are superior. But this is just some sort of a foot note 'cause my point being the battery life (and also the performance aspect couldn't been totally overlooked since you said this: <em>"That could mean improved performance in every area relative to Atom, hopefully without sacrificing battery life"</em>.
Further more, one can raise doubts that even in single core models Atom will win the battery life contest over Brazos. Zacate will lose, that's for sure. Ontario has a good chance to lose but this remains to be seen.
I also think like you that AMD can and will win some design wins here, the graphic performance being that good. And especially when the price plays in. But that's another story.
evident - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
Who in their right mind would buy a crippled laptop for $384. There are so many better choices of machines out there, such as the ULV C2D laptopstehslax - Sunday, December 19, 2010 - link
Its almost a scam.I have a asus dual core atom netbook(selling on ebay)
The performance is only SLIGHTLY faster than single core atoms
I wanted something portable but the loss in performance is completely frustrating
Ended up buying a thinkpad x201, yes its more expensive but I got protability with power
The netbook platform is a joke...
Shadowmaster625 - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
...And the ship of sanity sails yet further away into the horizon. At what point does this absurdity become apparent to everyone? $1200? $2500? Hell HP should market a $10,000 crappy atom netbook just to see how many true suckers there are out there. I for one would like to know once and for all. Never mind that a K125 netbook costs $300 and can outdo this thing in every measurable category.So why dont we have more AMD design wins? I hope everyone understands why by now. It is because the guys who make the decisions on what chips to use.... well you know they all own 50 times as much Intel stock as they do AMD (if they own any AMD at all). That's because Intel is a DOW component. So if they have any money then chances are part of it is invested in Intel. So of course they're going to use Intel parts for the majority of designs, regardless of how craptastic they are. A $45 crystal HD decoder? Can I get a WTF? What kind of idiotic hare brained pipe dream hackjob solution is that? I bet broadcom execs bribed intel execs to make NM10 especially crappy just so Broadcom could sell a bunch of junk chips that dont even work right. Does an AMD chipset even cost that much?
Who decided that it somehow makes sense to waste $45 on a crackheaded patchjob HD video solution when they could just use an AMD chipset, which is cheaper anyway, and then dump that $45 into a larger battery?
erwos - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
The pricing is absurd. The Asus 1210N and 1015PN come in way below that, even upgraded to match specs.Hell, my refurb Alienware M11x cost less.
lgpOnTheMove - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
HP has the 11.6" dm1z Nile netbook. It's without a doubt the best netbook as far as performance is concerned, and not much bigger or heavier than a 10" Mini 210.I'm actually surprised why HP hasn't made an enterprise 11.6" netbook. I would love to see the Nile platform inside a chassis like the 5103.
seanleeforever - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
okay. Jarred, do you really think this keyboard is "the best 10” keyboard I’ve ever used". I had a HP Mini 210, not 5103, but something that has the exact same keyboard. it is easily the WORST keyboard i have used (i give it to my cousin the second day because of it). and it has nothing to do with the keyboard built. it has to do with stupid keys themselves. and i simply cannot understand why this review doesn't even mention this gigantic flaw (unless they changed it in 5103, which i doubt)the smart HP engineers thought no one use F keys, as a result, the secondary function of "F" keys are swapped with the primary function. confusing? let me give you an example.
say you want to close a program by ctrl + F4, perform a search by pressing F3, refresh website using F5, or go to address bar using F6, or full screen using F11. you cannot do it. you have to press fn + F keys to do. i mean, unless you are totally newb who doesn't use any shortcut keys, this laptop is simply unusable. to close an application i now have to press fn+ctrl+f4. some more complicated actions such as print word doc ("Ctrl + Shift + F12") now is unachievable thanks to this stupid keyboard.
NOW. as i learned later on there is a way to solve it, and that is going to BIOS. but why doesn't HP make it default? and not every computer you use will give you the access to BIOS. and how many end user actually know this trick?
all in all, giant flaw, i repeat. GIANT FLAW.
JarredWalton - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
I don't know about the 210, but I did try the Mini 311 and it's definitely not the same keyboard. Also, as you mention you can switch the functionality of the F keys in the BIOS, which is something I did almost immediately. Dell and a few others have tried the same thing for some reason... blame silly UI consultants. That said, the "best 10" keyboard" is still a far cry from a good 13.3" keyboard. :-)Belard - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
Its a reason I don't like Microsoft keyboards as the default settings for F-function are swapped for something else "Launch Word" "Launch Browser" etc. So after every time you boot up, you have to press the F-Lock key to turn on Normal F-Keys.I think the big-boys have done market research and found that most of todays users, especially younger generation, don't really make much use of F-Keys. Look at the ChromeOS netbooks for example... even doing away with the CAPS-Lock (which is understandable, if they simply make Holding the SHIFT key for a second turned it into a lock).
Jackattak - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
$688 for a netbook is obscene. I don't care what freakin' market you're in for a portable PC or what "selection of features" you're looking for. Anyone stupid enough to spend that kind of money on a freakin' netbook deserves to be a victim of a Justin Bieber concert teenage girl stampede.Malih - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
I think that price is only when you have opted for multi touch screen, and multi touch NOTEbook is priced higher than $688, cmiiwBelard - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
The quality of the build and the multi-touch screen doesn't make it worth $688~700, thats the point.An iPad starts at $500 and is more functional and easily better built. A 3G iPad starts at about $600. Hence, Apple's tablet has destroyed the netbook market over night...
The point of netbooks was a cheap and light-weight tool access the internet, they were NEVER designed to be your main-computer, even thou they are easily more powerful than the notebooks/desktops from 2001. And for $250~300, they *DO* make good kid computers (5~8) with their small keyboard.
The iPad make everything a lot easier. Hopefully we'll see even more tablet devices for the $300~500 range that are built well. Check out the enTourage - eDGe Dual Book, its about $500 and has both a B&W "paper" display for ebooks and a color multi-touch. And yes, neither of these devices replace a full size notebook.
JarredWalton - Sunday, December 19, 2010 - link
I have to *strongly* disagree with several of your assertions. First, to just go and state that the "iPad is built better" is completely glossing over many things. It's got a better display, and better touch capabilities, but total storage, memory, expansion options, and other features aren't better at all. I can't even tell you how silly it is to pretend typing on the iPad is a good experience... even with the addition of the keyboard dock, it's not something I would enjoy.In terms of pure performance potential, Atom N550 is WAY ahead of the iPad processor; it's not even close. In fact, even Atom N450 is way ahead of the iPad CPU. ARM processors of any form are a big step down in performance from even Atom, but they also use a lot less power. But there's more to it than raw performance (see below).
Another part of the equation is that the iPad sports a pretty decent GPU, all things considered. GMA 3150 is a joke, but I suspect the next generation Atom will improve that area. But a slow CPU with a moderate GPU can be made to work really well when you combine the final piece of the puzzle, and that piece is the OS.
iPad runs iOS, which is tailor made for the CPU + GPU + RAM combination that iPhone and iPad offer. Windows 7 works on Atom, but it isn't even remotely ideal. This is why I tried running Chrome OS on the 5103 to see what would happen. Even though the build I tried wasn't a great success, when we see the final Chrome laptops I think it could be a greatly improved experience. I'd still rather see something more like Android than basing everything out of the browser. When I boot up Chrome OS and launch into the browser, I'd rather see something like your typical smartphone layout.
synaesthetic - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
Why isn't anyone trying netbook-oriented Linux distros anymore?I bet a lightweight Linux OS would absolutely fly on this thing!
I just recently put Ubuntu Netbook Edition on an old eee PC 900HD and it is at least twice as fast as it was running Windows XP. And the UBE UI design is somewhere between a smartphone and proper desktop Ubuntu, it really works nicely on these small computers.
My partner will soon be trading Windows 7 Starter for Ubuntu Netbook Edition on her Samsung N150.
I understand why Windows gained dominance on the netbook, but I wish it hadn't. Trying to run Windows on these things is what contributes to most folks' misconceptions about their capabilities. A netbook is perfectly capable of being a primary computer for people without extravagant needs--but only if the OS is tailored to the platform. Windows just isn't designed for these things.
Belard - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
In case you don't know...They make barbie-size Justin Bieber dolls. If I had more money to blow, I would get one and destroy and put it on Youtube :)
kilkennycat - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
I happen to have bought the Asus1215N-PU17 12-inch netbook in early October 2010.A great product, imho....
$484 on Amazon.
For that price, it comes with:-
D525 1.8GHz dual-core Atom
2GB Ram
Win7 Home Premium
GT218 nVidia GPU with Optimus fully functional.
( Zero problem with Bluray playback from an external BluRay drive either to the netbook screen or to a HDMI-connected 1080p display. WoW is very playable at medium resolution.)
Superb Wi-Fi sensitivity
1366x768 display
6-cell 56Wh battery
Typical 5-6hr battery "life"
Why anybody would pay any extra for a HP laptop or netbook today is totally beyond me....
Compared to other major manufacturers, the HP name means absolutely nothing today in terms of product support and HP's bloatware is probably the worst of any PC supplier.
I have sadly become closely familiar with HP's "wonderful" product support, having purchased a couple of HP laptops for family members, one 4 years ago and one 2 years ago. In the case of the 4-year old machine, there was a systematic motherboard failure in this particular model that results in the Wi-Fi first becoming inoperative, followed by other symptoms such as erratic loss of video. HP did issue a recall for a complete motherboard replacement about 2 years ago , but would only accept machines IN WHICH THE WI-FI ACTUALLY FAILED and BEFORE A SPECIFIC CUT-OFF DATE around mid-2009. Well, the Wi-Fi in our machine became inoperative in early 2010.... and the video started very occasionally but randomly blanking 3 months ago.The machine now bears a close resemblance to a door-stop... it cannot be trusted ever again. "Hard luck" says HP.. "the recall period has expired... only a $400 (or more) repair...." There was a time when a HP warrantly meant 100% lifetime support for ANY manufacturing defects discovered after shipment. That time is long since gone... it went when Carly Fiorino arrived at HP, it went with all the layoffs and the bottom-line focus....
The seconf HP machine I bought 2 years is still working fine, but I am keeping a close eye on product recalls...
Sorry, no more HP machines for me or our family.
JarredWalton - Sunday, December 19, 2010 - link
Personally, this is why I would never buy a consumer desktop offering from most OEMs. It's also one of my major concerns with laptops. Lucky for me I can use any one of a number of laptops, and I'm able to frequently move between models, but if I had to buy my own laptop I'd almost certainly get a business offering. They're usually made to last, come with better support, and don't go with the silly consumer fads. Unfortunately, they also cost a lot more and it's still tough to find a good LCD.Belard - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
I'm not a Mac user... but this is why Apple does very well...Apple would NOT come out with a product that is such a POOR user experience (not the same as defective yellow LCD screens on iMacs) - in which things DON'T work the way they should.
Really? $700 for this thing? For $525 or so, a person can pick up a 14" Thinkpad Edige which has about a 4hour battery and a far more powerful dual core CPU. Hitting about $700 - and you start hitting close to a bottom line $850 Thinkpad T410 series.
Of course, anyone can pick up any 15" wal-mart class bottom end notebook for about $400~500 with a more powerful CPU... yes yes, its not 2-3lbs with a decent battery....
netbooks work at the market with a $250~350 price range, anything more - a person should just get a normal notebook or a high end thin-notebook.
damianrobertjones - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
"The second issue with the touchscreen interface is precision. Tapping on the screen to “click” often misses your intended target, and the same goes for dragging, selecting text, etc. With a UI build around touch, this could be alleviated, but the standard Windows UI isn’t sufficient. A mouse is a highly precise pointer that targets a single pixel; replacing that with your stubby fingertip that covers perhaps hundreds of pixels and then trying to determine where you clicked is difficult at best, and the result left me wanting"Ok, I've owned a Latitude XT and XT2, Acer 1820ptz and 'even', an Archos 9. They all had one thing in common... an SSD drive fitted by me and a re-install of windows 7. I obviously did a small amount of tweaking, Windows search turned off etc.
I then CALIBRATED the touch option. I then changed the Display DPI to 125%.
Why can't reviewers MENTION these things instead of bashing something that, in all honesty, if perfectly fine, acceptable, easy to use as Windows touch? Baffles me
JarredWalton - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
Right. It would be great if Windows' calibrate option actually made things better. It works *okay*, but running the calibration tool (where you click on the crosshairs in the corners of the display) made things worse when I tried it. Maybe it's just this particular display/netbook, with a 1/8" ridge around the panel that makes targeting the edges difficult? As someone who uses an iPod Touch regularly I can say for certain that it's nowhere near as pleasant an experience. I've gone into the Windows Pen options, and there's nothing in there that I've tried that made the precision better.To better explain my complaint, if you're trying to "click" on a large button, the interface works well. Clicking on small targets is where you run into difficulties -- like say I misspell a word like "caibrate" and I want to go back and click in between the "a" and the "i" to insert the missing "l". Yes, you can do it, but it will often require several tries to get the cursor right where I want it. (And for the record, the iOS "magnifier" tool that helps you position the cursor feels equally clunky.)
But that's just one example; tapping on a hyperlink on a webpage when there are two close together is imprecise and you might get the top link when you were aiming for the bottom, or vice versa. There are radio buttons and check boxes where you'll "miss" because you didn't click right where the program wanted to.
Changing the DPI can help in some instances, and do nothing in others. An SSD will help speed up some things as well, but it certainly won't make Flash suddenly run smooth as butter. To pretend that such things are a panacea is disingenuous. To imply that "I'm doing it wrong" just because I don't like the way it works is just as good as Steve Jobs' comments on antenna-gate.
I've used a pen-based device before and that was better than using my finger on this netbook, but it still wasn't perfect. So far, every touch interface I've tried with Windows has worked fine for some things but not as well for others. It's a lot like the TrackPoint and Touchpad compared to a mouse; some people love the experience and others don't. But trust me when I say that I've done plenty of optimizations to make this netbook run about as well as it possibly can (i.e. disabling nearly all of the HP utilities and software, turning off Windows services that aren't necessary, defragging the hard drive, etc.) It's still sluggish and could benefit from an OS and UI optimized for netbooks and touch rather than a full copy of Win7.
NCM - Sunday, December 19, 2010 - link
damianrobertjones writes:"Why can't reviewers MENTION these things [SSD, Win7 reinstall, OS tweaks, recalibrate touch, search turned off] instead of bashing something that, in all honesty, if perfectly fine, acceptable, easy to use as Windows touch? Baffles me"
You may as well ask why some Chevy econobox isn't higher rated considering how fast it would go with suspension and engine work.
Why ever should a buyer be expected to do those things, and why should AT evaluate a product on that basis? Baffles me...
damianrobertjones - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
P.s. Having the APple macbook pro at the top of nearly every chart will probably take sales away from the other oem's. I bet they cannot be pleased by this!ProDigit - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
Why would you guys include a Corei and core2duo processor in the benchmark, this is just ridiculous!JarredWalton - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
ULV processors compete in the same power space, at least in theory, and Apple manages substantially better battery life (under OS X at least), plus we wanted to show some other IGP solutions.Lord 666 - Saturday, December 18, 2010 - link
Dual core AMD and discrete video ATI 4225JarredWalton - Sunday, December 19, 2010 - link
You do realize that in terms of performance, the Toshiba T235D is the exact laptop configuration you're requesting? Sure, the HP build quality and other aspects would be different, but the performance should be unchanged (K625 dual-core plus HD 4225).Lord 666 - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
No, was not aware of that. Thank you for the responseJamahl - Sunday, December 19, 2010 - link
I think this is a sneaky attempt by intel to make people totally sick of netbooks before brazos arrives. What a pile of horse $@#%Ethaniel - Sunday, December 19, 2010 - link
HP can have a wild sense of humor, and 700 bucks for "this" proves it. And the Atom, well, I remember the fact that the old Celeron ULV (fully-clocked) used on the first models of the EeePC could beat the crap out of the Atom. It doesn't matter if it had a revision or if it's a dual core now: It's the same lousy chip. Intel couldn't use it in MIDs because MIDs were a fail. And they can't use it on a phone because it's still too hot and inefficient. ET's cartridges were dumped in the desert. Well, netbooks are the "desert" were Intel can dump the Atoms, and make money in the process.LostBeacon - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
I've owned the similiar HP Mini 210-2000 since October, and it is much better than the 5103 for about $200 less It has the N550 dual-core CPU, 2GB DDR3 RAM, 250 GB 7200 rpm HD, 802.11n, BT, 6-cell 72wh battery (no protruding bump), 1366x720 display, Intel 3150 GMA with Crystal HD video accellerator (onboard chip), Windows 7 Home Premium-32 bit. Build quality is excellent, no problem with HD playback, and bettery life is more than 7 hours (rated 10+).,and good chicklet keyboard. Base price was $329,as configured $510..voltronnn - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
Every single time.. without fail... come the few who have to proclaim... spluttering.. that netbooks are not powerful enough, blah blah.
I own about a half dozen pc's, laptops and a netbook.
The netbook is not as powerful as the pc's or the laptops
Its not supposed to be
I use it for browsing the internet
oh and watching some NON-HD videos..
and when I am on the couch watching tv to order some xmas present..
and when I am out in the sunshine
and when I am on the train on a 5 hour journey..
in fact I've ended up using it more than the other pc's put
together
Because..
its small, light, portable, cheap and has a long battery..
My desktop and laptops do not have ANY of these features
If you are a gaming enthusiast and cannot deal with the fact that a 300 euro netbook cannot play GTA4 at the highest settings, or that you can't watch your HD videos while running a virus check while running 3Dmark06.. then.. don't.. get... one.
Small, light, portable, long battery life - try to understand.. jesus
seanleeforever - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
your logic is flawed.instead of spending money on laptop/desktop/netbook and what have you, and only uses 1/4 of your investment every time, you could simply buy a ultra portable, and use your investment 100% of time. (not to mention the hassle of migrate files, sync folder and what not).
my x201 tablet weights about 3 lbs, 7 hr battery life, i7 core, ssd and IPS. small, light, portable (very portable because it is a tablet), and process 1080p flash and still have 60% of cpu power to do other stuff.
sure it is costly on the paper (about 10 time more expensive than my HP Mini 210), but i use it 100% of time.
synaesthetic - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
I disagree with netbooks being portable. They're more portable, but when I had a netbook and a desktop compared to having just a full-size laptop, I used my netbook no more often than I use my laptop now. It was not any easier to quickly check something, because I still had to boot it... wait for the OS to start... be near a wifi connection... etc.My smartphone fills the portability niche.
LoneWolf15 - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
I just got a Dell Latitude E4200 from their Outlet for $690 after tax. That includes the following:SU9600 processor
2GB RAM
12.1" 1200x800 matte display with full-size keyboard
64GB SSD and external eSATA DVD writer
Six-cell battery
The HP netbook is pretty cool if you want new, but I got a 3-year warranty with the Latitude, but when I can get a $1700 ultraportable as a certified-refurb for about the same as the HP, and it performs faster and has superior construction quality (not that the HP is bad, just the Latitude is killer), then the Latitude wins. I was also able to easily add a WWAN card after the fact.
Still, HP is moving in the right direction with this. I hope more vendors will do so.
Guspaz - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
Atom has been on the market for almost three years now, and despite this fact, no significant advances have been made in power efficiency or performance.Compare the Atom 330, which came out in mid 2008 to the N550, reviewed today. Their power draw is about the same (8.5W versus 8W), and their performance and clockspeed is about the same (1.6GHz versus 1.5GHz).
Atom was underpowered when it was released, but fast enough to be useful. Today, performance is about the same, but the demands placed on it are higher. The end result is that Atom just gets worse and worse.
ULV products are a lot more interesting.
JarredWalton - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
The only problem with your post is that the Atom 330 didn't have SpeedStep, it didn't have an IGP, and it didn't have DDR3 support. We looked at the ASUS 1201N way back in the day with Atom 330 + ION, and because of the lack of SpeedStep the battery life was about half of what you can now do with the N550. But the rest of what you say is true, and I really hope the next Atom revision does more to improve the status of netbooks.synaesthetic - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
I'm afraid it won't, because Intel has already spent a great deal of time badmouthing netbooks as primary computing devices. They don't want netbooks to compete with their more expensive mobile processor lines. Hell, this is why they killed the SU2300 in the first place; because Acer was selling Aspire 1410s with that chip for $400 and it was selling like hotcakes, scarcely slower than the more expensive CULV chips!JarredWalton - Thursday, December 23, 2010 - link
I'm not so sure about your "simple math", rarson. The 5103 has a 29Wh battery, not a 66Wh battery (that upgrade is available, but it's not what I tested).Based on the figures in my review, at idle the Mini 5103 uses just 6.8W total. In the Internet test it uses 9.0W, and in the x264 test (the "worst case" scenario) it hits 12.9W. Of course, those are all on battery power, and I'd assume there's some inefficiency in getting power out of the battery and into the system.
As a secondary test, I just plugged the Mini 5103 into a Kill-A-Watt device to test power draw. Power adapter efficiency certainly comes into play in this test, and if it's 80% efficient (reasonable) the actual power draw is pretty close to the above calculations.
Idle: 10W
x264 playback: 13.5W
Cinebench SMP: 15W
So, again, TDP doesn't necessarily tell you a whole lot. Idle power requirements are much lower than TDP, and even heavy use will rarely hit TDP on everything, so you can't just add CPU, chipset, HDD, etc. TDPs to figure out how much power a system will actually use.