(Shorter bars indicate better performance)
(Shorter bars indicate better performance)
(Shorter bars indicate better performance)
(Longer bars indicate better performance)
 |
Rendering multiple CPUs | |
Rendering a single CPU |
System configurations:
Asus Eee Box
Windows XP Home SP3; 1.6Ghz Intel Atom N270; 1GB DDR2 SDRAM; 32MB (shared) Intel GMA 950 integrated graphics chip; 80GB, 5,400rpm Seagate hard drive.
Dell Studio Hybrid
Windows Vista Home Premium SP1; 2.1GHz Intel Core 2 Duo T8100; 2GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM; 128MB (shared) Intel GMA X3100 integrated graphics chip; 250GB 5,400rpm Samsung hard drive.
eMachines T5274
Windows Vista Home Premium; 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo E2180; 2GB 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM; 64MB shared Intel GMA 950 integrated graphics chip; 320GB 7,200rpm Western Digital hard drive.
Gateway GT5692
Windows Vista Home Premium; 2.1GHz AMD Phenom X3 8450; 4GB DDR2 SDRAM; 256MB (shared) ATI Radeon HD 3200 integrated graphics chip; 500GB 7,200rpm Western Digital hard drive.
ZT Affinity 7221Xa
Windows Vista Home Premium; 2.1GHz AMD Phenom X4 8450; 4GB DDR2 SDRAM; 256MB (shared) ATI Radeon HD 3200 graphics chip; 500GB 7,200rpm Seagate hard drive.
4%
2%
This is clearly in a very niche market segment, which is not oriented towards performance. I would expect to see this mounted to the back of an LCD monitor, where it would provide a good screen size "alternative" to the eeePC in the home or office.
For this reason, I would like to see the comparison charts include an eeePC as well.
The good: Tiny size, great for space restricted locations, office or home.
The bad: Low power means choose carefully soo that you won't be disappointed.