Help me find the right netbook

November 7, 2009 10:38 AM

Help me choose between these 11.6" netbooks!

I sold my 10" netbook because I have an important program that runs poorly in 1024x600. I'm going to buy a machine with an 11.6" screen. Battery life is by far the most important consideration. This machine has an 8 hr battery and uses a SU1400 processor. This machine is rated at 8 hrs, $50 more, and uses a SU7300 processor. How much difference would there be between the two processors, and which one would be faster? Is it worth the $50? This machine is the battery life champ, and it is the cheapest. Am I correct in assuming that the other two would be substantially faster?

posted by Crotalus to computers & internet (12 comments total)

Ok, you decided to buy a netbook on screen size. The processor power will unlikely make a big difference (as long as it is x86 based) and you don't use graphic intensive software (Games!).

But

1. I would never buy any laptop/netbook, without having tried the keyboard. One of the most important features. I found especially "foam-like" keyboards annoying (you press a key and the surrounding keys also go slightly down).

2. You should buy computer stuff at newegg.com

3. Eee more or less invented the Netbook and they know what they are doing. I have one and I had to get used a little bit to the "mousepad". The keys are are little bit hard-going.
posted by yoyo_nyc at 10:52 AM on November 7

I'd be careful about battery life measurements. I don't know what application you intend to run on it, but typically these numbers assume you sitting there idle for the duration. This matters because some processors can go into really low power idle states that the test may trigger but your intended use may not. And if you're concerned which processor is faster, you can pretty much throw those battery life quotes in the trash.

Getting technical, it seems the main difference between the SUI1400 and 7300 is cache size. They seem to have the same idle consumption, which makes sense because if you're not doing anything the cache isn't changing, and changing bit state is what consumes the most power in a transistor. One huge note: the Atom CPU netbook you've listed is single core, while the other two are dual core. While you can find dual core atom chips, they come with (unsuprisingly) double the power load, which gives you a hint why it's a better battery life contender.

Holistically, the processor is only one component that consumes power. You also need to consider the radio transmitters (Bluetooth, WiFi, GSM), video card, disk, display and operating system. If you're just running a photo slideshow, maybe dual core isn't important. If you're doing something that can push both cores to complete faster, you might discover dual core is a power saver; by finishing the job faster, you don't need to power the display, disk and GPU as long.
posted by pwnguin at 11:15 AM on November 7

For what its worth, I bought your third "this" (the Asus) about a week ago and I can report being completely chuffed about it. I like the keyboard, the screen is a good size considering... In a little bit I will be experiementing with turning it into a Linux box but for right now, all good.
posted by bumpkin at 11:37 AM on November 7

I have an asus, running Crunchbang Linux (a variation of Ubuntu) and the battery life, which was advertised at 8hrs. is actually usually more between 5 and 6 hours during actual use. But its not the same as the one you linked to - mine is the 1005ha.
posted by mannequito at 1:12 PM on November 7

yoyo_nyc: "2. You should buy computer stuff at newegg.com"

Depends on what factors you're considering. While I've found most things are cheaper at Newegg, sometimes Amazon does have the price advantage. Also this netbook might not be available at Newegg (but I haven't looked).
posted by IndigoRain at 1:16 PM on November 7

One small correction to what pwnguin said... the SU4100 and SU7300 are NOT dual-core processors; they are single core Ultra Low Voltage versions of Intel's Core 2 line of CPUs. Even the SU 4100, which says it is a "Pentium" based chip, is still built on the Core 2 architecture.

Most people do not consider the Acer Timeline series to be Netbooks, but rather more like an "ultra portable" laptop. The Intel CULV (Consumer Ultra Low Voltage) processors generally perform much better than the Atom line found in most Netbooks. You would probably be happy with either one of the two Timeline models you listed. As pwnguin said, the only difference is the amount of L2 cache, which does provide some performance increase in some, but not all, tasks.

I DO NOT recommend the Eee with the Atom Z520. That chip was originally intended for MIDs (Mobile Internet Devices). It has great power efficiency, and is paired with a better graphics processor and more efficient chipset than the standard N270 Atom that most netbooks have, but it can't do any serious work at all.

If the $50 is not much of a concern, I'd go with the SU7300-based Timeline. In addition to the slightly better processor, there is also another 1GB of RAM, which never hurts. But if you're trying to go for the cheapest adequate solution, the SU4300 Timeline will probably do just fine.

Note, though, that 1366x768 resolution is not THAT MUCH higher than 1024x600, and it's a slightly wider aspect ratio (a little under 16x9, whereas 1024x600 is 16 x 9.375). Not a huge difference, But you aren't gaining much vertical real-estate, if that's what you're looking for.
posted by XcentricOrbit at 2:24 PM on November 7

One small correction to what pwnguin said... the SU4100 and SU7300 are NOT dual-core processors; they are single core Ultra Low Voltage versions of Intel's Core 2 line of CPUs. Even the SU 4100, which says it is a "Pentium" based chip, is still built on the Core 2 architecture.

The first two computers the OP linked to, with the SU4100 and SU7300, are listed as dual core processors in the Amazon descriptions. Is that not true?

In any case, I wouldn't be happy with the single core Atom netbooks from the little I've used them. Just way too slow for me. But if battery life is the thing then they're the ones to get.
posted by 6550 at 2:44 PM on November 7

I stand corrected... I was completely wrong about those two processors. The first in the line of CULV cpus (the SU2700, 3300, and 3500), in the sub-500 Timelines were all single core... these are evidently new dual-core models. I did not know they had started putting them in the cheaper Timelines! Awesome! Learn something new every day. Sorry to contradict pwnguin!
posted by XcentricOrbit at 9:57 AM on November 8

Don't worry. I only consulted Wikipedia for information; I welcome contradiction in such a situation. The encyclopedia anyone can edit is also the one nobody should trust, after all.
posted by pwnguin at 2:11 PM on November 8

In that first link if you search for "core" you see that it says single core and dual core. Quite confusing.
posted by Wood at 3:42 PM on November 8

I'm browsing from my brand new Acer 1410 with the new Intel SU2300 dual core processor. You can say, it's the baby brother of the 1810TZ/T notebooks you are looking at. Right now, I think these 3 models are the best bang for the buck in terms of performance, battery life, and portability.

First, ignore the Celeron/Pentium nomenclature in the processors between the 1410 and 1810 series. The main difference is the processor speed and amount of L2 cache. 1410=1MB L2 cache, 1810TZ=2MB L2 cache, 1810T=3MB L2 cache. Based on the Passmark CPU scores, each step up is roughly about 10-15% better processor performance.

In the real world, I don't think there's that much difference with the majority of applications. I can play YouTube HD, Hulu HD, and all sorts of 1080p HD videos on my 1410 without any problems.

Of these three, you only need to consider the 1410 and 1810T. The 1810TZ is the odd man out because for $50, you get the faster SU7300 processor and 4GB RAM on the 1810T.

Acer 1410
SU2300 dual core processor, 1MB L2 cache
2GB RAM (2 x 1GB)
160GB hard drive
6-cell 4400 mAh battery (4.5-5 hours real world)
No bluetooth
$399

Acer 1810T
SU7300 dual core processor, 3MB L2 cache
4GB RAM (2 x 2GB)
320GB hard drive
6-cell 5600 mAh battery (6.5-7 hours real world)
Bluetooth
$599

So for $200 more, you get 2 hours of battery life, 2GB RAM, faster processor, and bluetooth. The 5600 mAh battery from a 3rd party is about $100 and 2x2GB RAM modules is about $100 so the 1810T is still a great deal if you want more performance.

Me, I went with the 1410 because I don't plan on doing anything hardcore on this notebook. I have a powerful desktop at home and work for that. I seldom use bluetooth but when I do, I just plug in this $3 dongle. And if I want more battery life for traveling, I can buy an extra 5600 mAh battery for $100 which would give me a combined 11 hours of battery life.

Other aspects that sold me on the 1410/1810 series are the full size keyboard, HDMI port, 3lb weight, SD slot, and 1366x768 resolution. It really is a great notebook and I can't tell you how happy I am with this purchase.
posted by junesix at 7:07 PM on November 8

I'm sorry that I wasn't more direct in answering your specific questions.

1. Yes, the $50 difference is worth it. 2GB DDR2 667MHz modules are about $45 so essentially in going from the 1810TZ to the 1810T, you're paying for the better RAM and getting the better processor for free.

2. The dual core CULV processors in the 1410/1810 series are an entire level up from the Atom processors (1001HA). Atom processors are fine if you're handling one or two tasks but for a modern multitasking environment, they're no match for CULV processors.
posted by junesix at 7:18 PM on November 8