>1.4GHz Atom x5-Z8300 >1.6GHz Atom x7-Z8700 >2.16GHz

somebody break it down for me

>>52593259
The Atom X5 and X7 are below i3s, and a step above Core M in real world usage.
The Celeron N2840 is a dual core, slower than both the X5 and X7 in CPU performance overall, and much worse Graphics performance.

The X7 is about a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo.
Or a Dual Core Skylake at 1.1GHz.

>>52593300
>The X7 is about a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo.
>Or a Dual Core Skylake at 1.1GHz.
how do you figure that? are there even any dual core skylake processors at just 1.1GHz?

>>52593311
He doesn't. He's pulling numbers out of his ass.

>>52593311
Approximation and comparing benchmarks.

>>52593259
They'll probably be perfectly serviceable for a basic facebook machine.

>>52593311
X7 compared to Broadwell Core M.

1st run, Core M beats Atom because it started cold. 2.1GHz TurboBoost vs. Atom
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/4928095?baseline=5006389

2nd run, Atom wins by a large margin, because Core M is heavily throttled. 800MHz Throttled vs. Atom.
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/4928138?baseline=5006389

>>52593300
Oh wow its been a lot since i've seen such misinformation. X5 and X7 atoms are way under the performance of core M and surely are still under a core duo @2.4ghz. They have 4 shitty smartphone cores clocked not even particularly high. Their ipc is about that of a Pentium 4 or even less. You are right on the celeron grafics tho, except that you ought to say it runs the same core architecture as the atoms so the only difference is that it has 2 cores against 4

Remember, cherry trail and bay trail are the atom architectures. They can have as much as 4 cores @2.4ghz but they will still be destroyed in benchmarks by any dual core past sandy bridge, even if it runs at 1ghz

Shit niggers. I have an n3450 and it out runs some i7s. These aren't bad at all for non-gaming.

>>52593300
I'm not too familiar with older gen intel stuff. What's that for AMD? Athlon X2 @ 2.6?

>/g/
>can't even look up some benchs

even gamer faggots from /v/ know better
https://cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Atom+x5-Z8300+%40+1.44GHz&id=2585

>>52593598
The x7-z8700 is like a "AMD A6-6210 APU or high-end ARM SoCs, e.g. the Snapdragon 810 or Exynos 7420."

>>52593259
Depends on how much CPU is used by the NSA.

I really don't like those small things. The smaller they get, the easier it becomes to hide shit in it. I already lost all confidence in software, and I'm not far from losing confidence in hardware too.

>>52593369
Did the Atom have 2 tests run as well ?
Because I'm fairly sure it throttles quite hard as well.

>>52593369
>geekbench3

>>52593369
Nice, That's what I call a bullshit benchmark now. Do you realize core M cpus cost 300€ while the best atoms barely reach 50€? By default core M are the better choice

They still perform like netbook CPUs, the only thing that has improved is power usage.

>>52593386
i had a tablet with a x5-z8300. and my core 2 duo p8400 destroyed it in CPU performance, but severely lost out when it came to graphics and video, as cherry trail atoms, hardware decoding up to 4k h.265.

>>52594010
I remember the good times when my t9300 @2.5ghz could handle youtube 1080p no problem and even managed to play 'original resolution' videos. Then youtube changed the player and now sometimes even 720p struggles, 480p is the new 1080p

>>52593386
>They can have as much as 4 cores @2.4ghz but they will still be destroyed in benchmarks by any dual core past sandy bridge, even if it runs at 1ghz

Now that's a large exaggeration, too.

>>52594249
it can handle 1080p videos fine, but 1080p60 it really struggles, and don't even think about flash video players.

>>52594249
Even the weakest atoms found in $100 tablets can play 1080p yt videos fine.

A Core M 5y10 still whoops the shit out of z8500 and lower Atoms, as long as the laptop/tablet it's in has decent heat dissipation.

>>52594349
core M's are the equivalent to the ULVs which were in the weird UMPCs, and have the full transistor count, while the atoms are extremely cut down core Ms.
>>52594319
that's because intel focused on GPU performance rather than CPU for cherry and bay trail, as my z8300 could play 4k youtube videos, but couldn't render anything in photoshop,

File: 5.png (72KB, 980x720px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 980x720px

>>52593369
throttling is heavily dependent on the passive cooling ability of the laptop

>>52594319
Atoms are modern cpus with an hardware decoder for running videos. If they had to run videos in software mode (like a core duo does because no such thing existed integrated inside the cpu that time) they'd struggle really hard with anything above 720p too. You can have a weak ass Pentium 3 paired to a decent decoder and you could play 4k videos without lag at all

>>52594265
Atoms are pretty much terrible. The only reason they look reasonably fast is their core count and optimized design. As was mentioned multiple times, the can play 4k videos without breaking a sweat and support the newest instruction sets that accelerate a lot of modern programs and Web browsing. Old cpus had none of that and thus in comparison seem slower in a lot of benchmarks.

But ok, I take back 1ghz and raise you with 1.5ghz no hyperthreading. That's about the same performance

File: Screenshot_2016-01-24-10-58-05.png (82KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 960x540px

Cherry trail Atoms use silvermont cores which are pretty energy efficient but also have worse performance compared to kabini cores (which in turn have worse performance compared to kaveri cores).

That said you're gonna want something with the Z8700 if you want to do a little bit of multi-tasking. The Z8300 has really bad multi-core performance and probably also won't be enough to play 1080p VP9 youtube streams stutter free.

>>52596353
tdp 4w vs 25w

>>52596353
Correction: Cherry trail atoms use airmont cores (which are really just silvermont cores shrunken down to 14nm)

>>52593259
Are you really this much of an idiot that you can't look up some basic fucking benchmarks?

Get the fuck out of this board and never ever come back

>>52593300
>a step above Core M
no fucking way

>>52594524
>>52596208
Sure, but it results in better usability.

>>52596272
Yeah, I'm just saying they are usable, not that they are fast CPUs.

>I take back 1ghz and raise you with 1.5ghz no hyperthreading
I can probably get on board with that.

>>52596353
I've used a z3735 with 1GB ram as my main PC when traveling and it wasn't so bad actually.

File: 1451999085041.gif (2MB, 292x351px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 292x351px

Atom is a shit! Atom is a Pentium III modern.

File: 1447565166628.gif (4MB, 512x404px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 512x404px

>>52596742
Fuck me.

>>52596505
>I've used a z3735 with 1GB ram as my main PC when traveling and it wasn't so bad actually.
That must have been excruciatingly painful. You're a brave person. I already start to panic on any system with only 4GB of RAM.

>>52593259
What are the point of these

>>52597702
Replacement for shitty ARM sticks.

>>52596742
I love you and I hate you at the same time.

>>52597736
Where can I get them?

Speaking of how /g/ may use these, perhaps a kodi server for the tv?

>>52593259
>N2840
An N2840 should have about 1000 in passmark, whereas a Pentium G3258 has about 4000. So it's 1/4 the speed of a G3258 in synthetic benchmarks.

File: shitpostingmachine.png (5KB, 437x92px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 437x92px

>>52597526
I use a celeron with 8gb of ram. At least this thing can run Civ 5

>>52596836
>>52597794
>>52596742
amanda love

File: 1453153313396.jpg (79KB, 719x689px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 719x689px

>>52593565

x7-8700 is 4 celeron M's from 2008 put together (almost catches up to Core 2 Duo e8400 in total performance), x5 z8500 is 3 celeron M's from 2008 in total performance (but it's quad core huehue) n2840 is basically a single core of core 2 duo e8400 split into two cores (snappy enough for chrome chinese cartoons etc)

>>52593259
The celron is a celron, dumbass
It's the same processor in the chromebook
Don't know shit about the others, probably underpowered garbage

>>52598049
let me guess, motherboard with embedded cpu? or are you on a laptop

>>52597526
It wasn't that bad. I mostly watched yt and talked on skype though.

>>52597526
I have a rugged tablet with an 2011 Atom, and a Toughbook with an even older mobile Celeron. Its really not that bad, both of them have SSDs, so I don't notice anything being slower aside from the inability to play video in a web browser.

More modern atom chips are probably higher performance than my Athlon X2 4200 system I played DOOM 3 on.

>>52598203
It is a laptop. Dell Inspiron 15-3521. It came with only 4GB of ram but I have a collection of hardware from computers/laptops given to me because they were "broken" so I just slapped in another 4GB stick.

The one thing that confuses me is this.

If i use the atom cpus or like even the N3700, all the browsers lag on heavy pages if you scroll, but if you use spartan the scrolling is smooth. The fuck?

>>52598399
Ah, found some 50$ motherboard with that exact celeron version embedded and that's why I asked. how does it perform? is it snappy?
>>52598441
I wonder if spartan is using the GPU heavily. use ublock and everything will be smoother on the other browser too

>>52598441
IE is very smooth on my hp stream 7 but it has no decent adblock so I use chrome, It's fine too but not as smooth.

Who /zenfone 2/ here? Any thoughts on the Atom quad core @ 2.33gHz moorefield? I know jack shit about it, sorry

>>52598477
>>52598500
I tried using chrome with ublock/noscript, but it's still nowhere as smooth as default spartan. I really can't wait till it gets adblock as i use my tablet with it.

>>52598522
ah, Spartan being a purely C++/C# application and having no extension system etc might be contributing to increased performance or it uses the GPU / CPU better somehow, chrome devs are the "Let's use abstractions and Node.JS it's 2016 duuuh" type, fuck chrome

File: shitpostingmachine2.png (43KB, 807x402px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 807x402px

>>52598477
It is not really that snappy but it definitely gets the job done. Compared to my desktop(4790k) it is slow as balls

>>52593318
then please, enlighten us on some actual information instead of berating him

>>52598500
adding easylist to your "Tracking Protection" lists blocks all the same stuff as adblock plus, minus youtube ads.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/IEGallery

>>52598612
Yesterday I repaired an i7 4770 PC and had to give it back to owner after 3 days of usage and I almost cried, I didn't want to give it back and go back to my N2840 ;-; thanks for the feedback man

>>52593259
dont waste money on that stupid shit. Just buy a raspberry pi

>>52598587
>or it uses the GPU / CPU better somehow
There are two very simple explanations for this. First off, Microsoft have been dumping tons of money into IE since the refocus to optimising for tablets and phones. The second reason is that they're developing for their own OS, of course they'd known how to utilise it better.

>>52598923
The intel sticks are overpriced but a rasperry doesn't really compare.

>>52598777
>and had to give it back
Why didn't you keep it?

>>52599638
Would a mechanic keep a car after he repaired it for someone?

>>52599726
Would a mechanic use the car?

>>52599799
If it was required to determine if the problem was fixed. That poster never said he used it for anything personal just that it was used.

>>52598501
I /zenfone 2/. Don't know much about the performance, but never been limited by it, which is fine by me.

>>52598049
>use a $500 laptop to play Civ 5
>mid settings
>shitty discrete GPU goes up to 80 C, same goes with the CPU

I thought it would run a 2010 game.
And I also thought the iGPU would manage it.

>>52593259
Simply put: Core M are notebook CPUs, Atom are tablet CPUs. Celeron is a lowend desktop CPU, afaik, with some mobile versions.

But, it depends which generations are you comparing, because 6th gen Core Ms are much better than previous ones. I think their integrated graphics have improved a lot.

>>52599299
Actually the cheapest one ($159) seems the only one which is worth the money.
Sure, you can get a tablet for that money, but it's gonna be a shitty chink-made tablet with a small screen.

>>52599988
>Core M are notebook CPUs

So I assume Core M compared to mobile i3/i5/i7s are basically much lower voltage and passively cooled rather than crammed ovens? Haven't been keeping up with Intel side of things outside of Desktop CPUs.

>>52600153
Still it's way to much. Is it the z3735 one?
It's clear they are making a lot of money of those sticks, when you can get a tablet for $100 with the same CPU. I have a $100 tablet and it's not bad actually, as I have said many times in this thread.

>>52600327
>passively cooled
These sticks have at least one fan, I think. Well, the first generation had one fan, not sure about these.

According to the reviews I've read the fan only kicks in if you watch HD videos or do heavy multitasking. If you're just browsing the web, the fan normally shouldn't start.

>>52600359
I don't think there's any z3735.

Intel says the cheapest model is Atom x5-Z8300 (2M Cache, up to 1.84 GHz).

http://ark.intel.com/products/91065/Intel-Compute-Stick-STK1AW32SC

>>52600426
there is
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/compute-stick/compute-stick-product-brief.html

>>52600465
Those are the 2015 models.

>STCK1A32WFC
Win8.1 stick
>STCK1A8LFC
Linux stick

This year there won't be a cheaper Linux stick. Just 2 models without a preinstalled OS. But those are from the Core M models.

>>52593259
>What are these 'mobile' things equivalent to in real processors
Pentium E2160

>>52600397
Not sure about the compute stick but I'm sure other Core M products like the Macbook and Asus Zenbook are completely passively cooled.

>>52600534
I guess it's just not possible to cram so much computing power in such a small space before it melts the case. So they included a small fan.

If the compute stick was a small but bigger box, passively cooled, has 2+ usb3 ports and was $50-30 cheaper it would have been nice.

>>52600618
What could you be doing with 4 USB ports on a device that is meant to be plugged in the back of a display? It already has one USB 3 and one USB-C, if I'm not mistaken. Plus the SD card slot. And a 2x2 WiFi antenna, so it can handle simultaneous uploads and downloads. There's also Bluetooth 4 on it. Imo, seems enough for a TV stick, if you ask me.

What sucks is that because of Microsoft's restrictive policy on licensing, they couldn't ship the cheaper model with 4GB of RAM. Microsoft wouldn't allow these small devices to come with preinstalled Win10 at such a low price.

>>52593259
>i3? i5? pentium 2?
what's the matter? can't look up specs for yourself? need intel's good goy badges to explain things for you?

>>52600735
Nevermind, it doesn't have usb-c.

>Form Factor 113 millimeters by 38 millimeters by 12 millimeters (4.4488 inches by 1.4961 inches by 0.4724 inches)
>Processor • Soldered-down Intel® Atom™ processor
>― Integrated graphics
>― Integrated memory controller
>― Integrated PCH
>Memory • Soldered-down single-channel DDR3L-RS 1600 MHz memory • 2 GB total memory
>Graphics • Integrated graphics support with Intel® HD Graphics Technology:
>― High Definition Multimedia Interface* (HDMI*)
>Audio Intel® High Definition (Intel® HD) Audio via the HDMI interface
>Peripheral Interfaces • One full size USB 3.0 port
>• One full size USB 2.0 port
>Storage • 32 GB soldered-down Embedded MultiMediaCard (eMMC) onboard storage
>• One Micro SD card slot (SDXC v3.0 with UHS-I support)
>BIOS • Intel® BIOS resident in the Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) Flash device
>• Support for Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI), Plug and Play, and
>System Management BIOS (SMBIOS)
>Wireless LAN Soldered-down Intel® Dual Band Wireless-AC mo

>>52600735
The stick form factor is silly. It doesn't fit everywhere. It's the reason the it needs a fan. If you insist on it being behind your TV.. include a small piece of double sided tape.

2+ USB3 ports would make it the perfect home server for most people too. I swear they are doing something with every cheap device to make sure it can't be used as a server.

Sure you could use a hub but those are a bit pricey for an already pricey stick.

>>52600890
It has an extension cable.
You can plug it in any way you please.

>>52593259
What the fuck is the purpose of these?

Who would plug some shitty compute stick into a desktop/laptop that already has a better cpu?

>>52600929
Yes but I still has the crappy stick design.

>>52600936
no, you plug it into screens and TVs not computers.

>>52597526
I mean if you was your only PC yeah it would suck but I've gotten by on pretty terrible specs and I've still been able to do most of what I do on my main machine except high-end gaming. for like 2 years the only PC I have was an old aspire one (atom n25 or something?) and then an x41t (L7400?). both weak as hell but with the right software you can still get a good experience, even play HD video and play old games. I ran windows 7 on both machines.

>>52600936
The head is a HDMI not a USB ya dingus. You plug it into your TV. They're micro PCs.

>>52600936
Browsing the web on your TV basically and watching youtube.
As well as doing some light productivity shit, like writing a a text document.
You could also watch movies on it, though I think they would suck for 4k, only HD.

>>52600982
>>52600993
For what purpose? Why does my TV need a compute stick?

>>52600994
Why the fuck would i not just buy a smart TV if i wanted that?

>>52598620
>prove me wrong, lol
Burden of proof, etc.

>>52601008
Dunno, does a smartTV cost just 159 bucks more than a non-smart TV? You tell me.
Can you do whatever you can do on a desktop PC on a smartTV? Can you open an office doc or download some files from your server?

>>52601008
SmartTVs suck dick but compute stick only makes sense if you need x86 software. Which is why I think it would be better with more USB so it can be a server.

>>52601008
ŧbh fám i was just telling you what it was. i dont actually take much interest into compute sticks.

>>52601042
They probably are if i look hard enough for one

>Can you do whatever you can do on a desktop PC on a smartTV?

On Android ones you can basically do everything you said thee. No clue about the other ones.


Hell if you actually wanted your TV to become a PC just fucking hook up an HDMI 2.0 cable to it from your gpu and bam, you can do whatever the fuck you want and not be limited by some shitty compute stick.

Honestly who the fuck is going to sit in their living room and type documents out or play some program that needs a keyboard/mouse on a fucking TV.

May as well just plug in your desktop to it and use it like a monitor.

>>52601119
Well, let's say I want to watch a football match with my dad in the living room and I want to load a football stream on a PC.

Why the fuck would I use a massive HDMI cable to bring the signal from my PC, when I could just plug one of these sticks in the TV, turn it on, then use my smartphone as both a keyboard and a mouse, and launch the stream. This 2016 model includes a program which is launched when the stick boots up and which pairs your smartphone with the stick, if you have the intel app installed on your phone. Easy peasy, time to watch football. No huge-ass hdmi cable needed and no need to have an extra box next to the TV (a htpc) for such a humble task.

>>52601229
Any arm device would do that, why pay 2x the price for a x86 device with a whiney fan?

>>52601229
LITERALLY THE ENTIRE POINT OF A SMART TV

The vast majority of TVs over 50" are smart, especially if they are 4k. You'd have to go out of your way to find some old 1080p model that happens to not have smart just to make use of these compute sticks.

Give it another year or two and they'll probably stop making non-smart TVs all together.

>>52601275
Why would I go through the hassle of connecting a tablet to a TV using cables, then control the content via the tablet, etc etc? When I could just sit on the couch and use the phone to do all this, while the stick is plugged in the tv, I don't even have to see it. It's far enough that you won't hear any sound from the fan. And I'm watching football, so I'll blast the speakers up to hear the match.

Also, I have a desktop OS on the stick, can do anything you can do on a desktop on it. Heck you could run Photoshop on it, probably, if you really insist. Though the performance should be shit.

You can run a full-fledged Office on it too. You know, not the gimped mobile version, the real program.

>>52601320
I don't have either a 4K memeTV or a SmartTV. Yes, I'm poor, so this stick brings smartTV functionality with just a 150 bucks expense. Don't even need to buy a new TV.

>>52601345
>can do anything you can do on a desktop on it.

Except run anything meaningful on it without it becoming a third degree burn stick.

>>52601372
>meaningful
It's not like you're going to start your usualy desktop routine on it and open 100 chrome tabs, a music program and 30 torrents in the background and then complain it's throttling.
It's good for running just one or a few tasks at most at a time. Which is what I would be doing if I'm watching a match or a movie on it. Or just writing a fast text document on it.

>>52601345
There's a plethora of arm devices you keep behind your TV. Why would you use a tablet?

Mobile office is good enough for normalfags actually. I sure hope no one is going to do serious office work on a stick and TV, much less PS. This is meant to be used in environments where there is better PCs in the same building you can use, unlike a tablet.

>>52601359
I see now why you are poor.

>>52601426
Oh, does having a 4K memeTV qualify me as a normal dude and not having one as a poor dude?

I'm OK with that. There isn't much 4K content anyway,enjoy your meme tv.

File: android-5-1m8s-m8s-plus-amlogic-S812.jpg (35KB, 550x370px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 550x370px

I have t-this.

CPU: Amlogic S812 Quad core ARM Cortex-A9r4, 2.0GHz
GPU: Octa-core ARM Mali-450
Memory: 2GB DDR3

It plays 4k with no problems, and it works great with youtube, chaturbate and other streaming sites and it only cost 47€.

>>52602010
>Android
Might as well get a chromecast.

File: 1453218744878.jpg (76KB, 666x999px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 666x999px

>>52602464

Can the top end computer stick handle some civ5?

>>52602704
Maybe but it won't be pleasurable that's for sure.

>>52598049
Do you wait 10 mins in between turns? I played a game on epic on turn 1200 my 580 @ 4.7 takes about 45 sec almost full load to progress to next turn

>>52602704
The Core m5-6Y57 vPro will most likely be able to do gaming as well as an average or lowly laptop.

http://ark.intel.com/products/88197/Intel-Core-m5-6Y57-Processor-4M-Cache-up-to-2_80-GHz

But paying 499 bucks to game on a PC stick plugged into a TV seems kinda retarded. At that price you get a capable NUC, I think.

Only the cheapest model is the best value per performance, imo. Even that seems a bit pricey compared to other alternatives. I'm sure there will be chink ripoffs for like half the price, but with shit cooling and worse performance, so at least you'll be able to get a cheaper one, if you really want one.

File: Original-Pipo-X7S-Dual-Boot-Mini-PC-TV-Box-Windows-8-1-Intel-Z3736F-Quard-Core.jpg (142KB, 930x544px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 930x544px

>>52602464
You can get similar things in x86 with Atoms.

I have a pipo x7s, it has an atom Z3736F, 2gb RAM and 32gb eMMC, dual boots win10 and android. I use it for XBMC, browsing and also emulation. It's nice because it's a completely separate computer that uses about 2 watts idle and there's no reason to ever turn it off, I offload tasks to it from my desktop.

>>52603422
Except that the pipo is like 10 times bigger than these sticks, basically the size of a router. It does have extra USB ports and ethernet, but that makes it a less portable device, imo.

(Well, actually, if you take into account that these Intel sticks come with a small brick as an external power source, they're not that portable, come to think of it.)

Everything else seems the same, spec for spec, except maybe the intel sticks have newer CPUs and cost $ 50 more.

>>52601008
because it lets you have an HTPC that's small and cheap (though without the mass storage, but then you could stream from your main). having an actual computer hooked up to your TV is miles better than using smart TV shit or a console/player box.

>>52602934
I haven't played an epic on this machine yet because I was more interested to see if it would actually work. So far I am on turn ~200 and it only takes about ten to twenty seconds. Getting the game loaded is what takes the longest but after that it is smooth sailing.