AMD Neo Benchmarking Against Atom and CULV

[GrandMasterKhan]

http://www.liliputing.com/2010/01/how-w ... -cpus.html

Doesn't seem that bad versus CULV. Trounces Atom.

[jvarszegi]

I have to say that my friend's new dual core CULV UL20 laptop seems to have a good deal more processing power than my single core Neo. She was running some database software that I'm pretty sure would overpower the MV-40. In my own use I consider it to be just fast enough for office work without noticeable slowdowns. But I did have to increase the processor level to 66% on battery in order to avoid the odd slowdown browsing pages etc. So in my opinion it's just good enough for most office work (which hasn't changed much in many many years now), although I can guess that using it on super-spreadsheets or something else intense could overpower it. I really think Lenovo cleverly chose a quite borderline processor that was just good enough to be considered business-capable, without coming close to the X200 series in performance.

[GrandMasterKhan]

The dual core Neo seems to be very competitive versus the Intel equivalents. For me its all about price and where that lies along a continuim of possibilities based on price/value where value = power + portability + reliability. Without some kind of warranty extension the dual core is still a buy (maybe even against the Intel powered Asus) if one tips Thinkpad being familiar with the brand. But AMD and this talk about heat and the GOBI problems and the HDD clicking all of which are subjective and also possibly isolated or even perceived problems based on user error don't inspire confidence to purchase without an extended warranty. I just wish Lenovo would kick AMD to the curb and go with an Intel CPU but as you said its all about avoiding cannibilization. Maybe on the X110e will happen?

[ThinkRob]

The dual core Neo seems to be very competitive versus the Intel equivalents.

Performance-wise, yes. It's absolutely abysmal (in comparison) when it comes to power consumption.

[jvarszegi]

I'm not trying to tout the MV-40, which I do think was an underperformer intentionally chosen for that reason. But it's not really all that inefficient compared to Atom processors, is it? It's roughly twice the processing power with roughly half the battery life. So, for example, on my 11.6" X100e I can squeeze out over 5 hours if I dim the screen and keep it running at reduced clock speeds, which cut it down roughly to an Atom at full speed or maybe a little better than that. Meantime an Atom can last much longer, but generally not under peak load, i.e. it has to be throttled too. So the Neos are not abysmal regarding power consumption, at least in terms of efficiency, except maybe that they are massively less efficient at their lowest power states (or cannot enter as low a power state).

All that said, the MV-40 would never be my first choice for a road warrior's laptop, ever. It's a budget processor that trades off battery life for processing speed (and extra heat).