Atom 330 vs. C2D SU7300

WillJitsu · Oct 23, 2009

I am about to purchase an ultraportable laptop and I'm trying to decide between two things.

First of all, I know this is not going to even be considered a "good" gaming machine, but I would like to know which of these processors will perform better in World of Warcraft.

Right now, I can order the Acer 1810T that has the SU7300 + 4500MHD graphics.

I have read about the ASUS eeePC 1201N that will have the Atom 330 + ION graphics.

Obviously the ION graphics are better than the 4500MHD, but I have heard that WoW is CPU intensive. So which of these two setups would offer the best performance in this game?

Thanks!

Bobnova · Oct 23, 2009

The SU7300 will wipe the floor with a atom330, brutally, with no remorse.
Clock for clock, the core2 architecture is almost twice as fast as the atom, so roughly speaking, the SU7300 would be equal to a 2.6ghz dual core atom.

I can't speculate on which laptop would play WoW better though.

WillJitsu · Oct 23, 2009

Great. That helps me out. Thanks for the response!

I really wish I could get the SU7300 with ION graphics. Ah well.

Evilsizer · Oct 23, 2009

the su7300 will perform better then the atom 330. i havent checked much but i dont think WOW go up to 4 cores. while atom 330 isa dual core with HT making it a fake quad core. at a clock speed of 1.6ghz that is equal to a Intel Banis cpu at 1.4ghz. also keep in mind the atom will have a much lower TPD then the Core 2 based cpu. according to intel the SU733 has a TDP of 10watts for a dual core with no HT vs Atom 330 1.6ghz with HT@8watts.

now if you could find one, which i havent yet. A ultra portable with the Atom N550, Dual core with HT@[email protected] TDP. another option is if you can find the atom N530 equipped in that ultra portable as it has 2watt or the N530P 2.2watt TDP. Both of the N530's are dual cores and have HT with a 1.6ghz clock speed.

Im still wishing intel would have used the N530 on their M-ITX atom setups. i would have gladly paid more to get one...

turbohans · Oct 24, 2009

Evilsizer said:
the su7300 will perform better then the atom 330. i havent checked much but i dont think WOW go up to 4 cores. while atom 330 isa dual core with HT making it a fake quad core. at a clock speed of 1.6ghz that is equal to a Intel Banis cpu at 1.4ghz. also keep in mind the atom will have a much lower TPD then the Core 2 based cpu. according to intel the SU733 has a TDP of 10watts for a dual core with no HT vs Atom 330 1.6ghz with HT@8watts.

now if you could find one, which i havent yet. A ultra portable with the Atom N550, Dual core with HT@[email protected] TDP. another option is if you can find the atom N530 equipped in that ultra portable as it has 2watt or the N530P 2.2watt TDP. Both of the N530's are dual cores and have HT with a 1.6ghz clock speed.

Im still wishing intel would have used the N530 on their M-ITX atom setups. i would have gladly paid more to get one...

ummmm, only the Atom 330 is dual core with HT. The list containing the rest of the Atom line is here

Evilsizer · Oct 24, 2009

i slipped,no biggie...

repilce · Oct 25, 2009

Su with the HD4500, hands down, speaking on the graphix it will handle wow on low-med setting with no AA with with a decent laptop resolution, just load the thing up with RAM and it will be VERY playable as long as u are realistic with your settings.

edit: not apples for apples, but the laptop cpu would have the upper hand vastely
I have a spare box with the 780g and a 2ghz quad, using the HD4200 onboard video and only 2gb ram.

@ 12x10 resolution i can pull 30+fps in dal when it's congested.

Alastayr · Oct 25, 2009

For sticking to the starter areas or unpopulated places, maybe even soloing, this setup might work okay. But don't think about raiding or going to Org/SW at prime time. You might not even be able to experience the WotLK content without heavy stuttering.

If a C2D @ 4GHz + HD4850 can't run raids on lowest details at more than 20fps, you probably won't either.

repilce · Oct 25, 2009

Alastayr said:
For sticking to the starter areas or unpopulated places, maybe even soloing, this setup might work okay. But don't think about raiding or going to Org/SW at prime time. You might not even be able to experience the WotLK content without heavy stuttering.

If a C2D @ 4GHz + HD4850 can't run raids on lowest details at more than 20fps, you probably won't either.

OMFG.. what resolution are you running at? and is that with AA cuz my 2.7amd dual with a 4870 and 4gb of ram can run 16x12 all settings (except shadows.. this may be YOUR problem, thier shadow's engine sux, turn shadows just one click up from off) maxxed, with 4x AA in 25 man ULDS with NO PROBS, and particle density up.

SERIOUSLY Alastayr, if you cant pull 20fps in a raid, with a 4ghz dual and that 4850 something is DEFINITELY not right...
With that setup, if your running any resolution 16x10 or under, you should be pulling 50+ fps in a raid easy with EVERYTHING turned up besides shadows and possibly particle density , unless you are only running like 1gb of ram...

Alastayr · Oct 25, 2009

repilce said:
SERIOUSLY Alastayr, if you cant pull 20fps in a raid, with a 4ghz dual and that 4850 something is DEFINITELY not right...
With that setup, if your running any resolution 16x10 or under, you should be pulling 50+ fps in a raid easy with EVERYTHING turned up besides shadows and possibly particle density , unless you are only running like 1gb of ram...

At 16x10 (but res doesn't matter) and lowest details. The machine has 4GB RAM. I don't play WoW anymore but my brother does and the machine was build specifically with WoW in mind. My parents nearly killed me when he complained that his new machine won't run the game much better than his old one (mostly what's in my sig now). But I saw it, the BC raids were nearly unplayable, even at lowest settings. There was one in a castle (?), spells started spamming and the framerate went single digit. I spent months and a few Windows reinstalls investigating the problem. Bad luck? Voodoo? I still don't know.

And it's the only game that does this. He can play DoW II at max. details, Far Cry 2 on high, you get what I'm saying. And a quick poll in his guild revealed similar behaviour on their PCs.

deed · Oct 25, 2009

Alastayr said:
At 16x10 (but res doesn't matter) and lowest details. The machine has 4GB RAM. I don't play WoW anymore but my brother does and the machine was build specifically with WoW in mind. My parents nearly killed me when he complained that his new machine won't run the game much better than his old one (mostly what's in my sig now). But I saw it, the BC raids were nearly unplayable, even at lowest settings. There was one in a castle (?), spells started spamming and the framerate went single digit. I spent months and a few Windows reinstalls investigating the problem. Bad luck? Voodoo? I still don't know.

And it's the only game that does this. He can play DoW II at max. details, Far Cry 2 on high, you get what I'm saying. And a quick poll in his guild revealed similar behaviour on their PCs.

odd.... Im running an onboard card 2gb ram and the same res but all on low and I get 40+

repilce · Oct 26, 2009

Agreed, Before the release of WoTLK, i was running a 4ghz e8400, with only 2gb of ram an an 8800GTS 512 (g92), with 16x12 and had significantly better performance than that with Very high settings. weird.

edit: but to try and steer this slightly back to topic, i think that your advice towards what he will be capable to do with what system is not "misinformed" per say, but based on a special case circumstance, which skews the outlook, i get better performance than what you are describing with my spare box which is a 2ghz quad, with the 780G onboard video and 2gb of ram all running stock. but at low settings. and 12x10

Atom 330 vs. C2D SU7300

WillJitsu

Member

Bobnova

Senior Member

WillJitsu

Member

Evilsizer

Senior Forum Spammer

turbohans

Member

Evilsizer

Senior Forum Spammer

repilce

Member

Alastayr

Member

repilce

Member

Alastayr

Member

deed

Member

repilce

Member

Similar threads