Performance comparison Intel Celeron M, AMD Geode LX800, Via C7 1.5GHz
Comments(4)
Ever since more and more small formfactor “cheap” laptops started showing up (it seems the segment really got started by the EeePC, but lately the Cloudbook, the HP Compaq 2133 and the Kohjinsha E8 have sparked my interest) I have been wondering about the relative performance of the underlying platform.
There are tons of sites analyzing the performance of the high end chips of AMD and Intel (Phenom and Core 2). From Anandtech to Tom’s Hardware and many other sites. But there’s very little data to be found on the lower end chips that I mention here. Imagine my excitement when I found one at Tolly Group – but then I saw that the study was commissioned by Intel; that makes it a little harder to take it at face value…
But even after a lot of googling, this is the only benchmark based comparison that I was able to find. And given the CPUs that it tests (the same one as in the E8, a faster one than in the Cloudbook and a slower one than in the EeePC), it does seem at least somewhat fair to draw conclusions from it.
The summary of the the results is easy – the Intel Celeron beat the AMD Geode and Via C7 in all benchmarks: SPEC CPU 2000, PCMark 05 and SANDRA 2007. Again, take it with a grain of salt, given where this comes from, but it does seem to confirm what I have read so far about the perceived performance of these systems.
Oh, and just for the record – even running at the full 900 Mhz, the EeePC feels a bit slow. Hopefully the Gen2 system will use a newer Intel platform (Diamondville?) and be a bit faster. But unsurprisingly, there’s no publicly available performance data for that, yet.
What about comparing with Intel A1xx series?
Comparing a Celeron M with 7W power consumption to an LX800 is a mistake, because the LX800 power consumption is less than 1W!
The Celeron M processor should have been compared to AMD Geode NX1500, because both have almost the same power consumption (AMD: 6W, Celeron:7W).
I think it should results a totally different scores…
Some One: exactly! I would like to see how any intel cpu compares to LX800 when undervolted and underclocked to match the power consumption of LX800
I have a MSI LX800 microITX board running as my Internet gateway and firewall on a Linux 2.4 kernel.
I have a microwave broadband connection, and a wired gigabit LAN connected to the two Ethernet ports on the MSI board. I have measured the transfer rate with and without the LX800 in place, and the 500mhz Geode does not introduce any latency. Not a processor intensive application I guess, but very cool (no heat sinks), silent (no fans) and it uses a minuscule amount of power. My former gateway computer burned up $225 worth of electricity a year running 24/7, so the Geode (and ITX board) will pay for itself in about 10 months.