Notebooks at Netbook Prices: How Low Can We Go?
by Jarred Walton on July 28, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Laptops
Other Wal-Mart Laptops
Wal-Mart has a reputation of driving costs down, and the $300 laptop does just that. However, we want to know what else users might need to look at once those special discount laptops are gone. We browsed through the current Wal-Mart site looking for other sub-$500 that looked reasonable.
Sticking with Wal-Mart for a few more systems, we have the Acer 15.6" AS5516-5474 for $378. The same laptop is at Frys for $340, so no Wal-Mart isn't always the lowest price around. Again, you can get an idea of just how good that $300 laptop is by comparison, since this Acer has a slower Athlon 64 TF-20 CPU (single-core, 65nm, 1.6GHz, 512KB L2) and less memory (2GB) at a higher price. Acer also uses the AMD RS690MN chipset with integrated ATI Radeon Xpress 1200 graphics - another downgrade relative to the Compaq laptop. All of the other features are essentially the same as the Compaq CQ60-419WM (160GB 5400RPM HDD, DVDRW, 802.11G) and this laptop will still be "fast enough" for typical computing tasks. Normally, this is about as cheap as it gets for a new full-size laptop, so sales are the better option if you're not in a hurry.
Here's an Intel version of the above system, with an Intel Celeron 585 processor (single-core, 65nm, 2.16GHz, 1MB L2, 667MHz FSB). Besides the change in CPU, this laptop also ships with a larger 250GB 5400RPM hard drive and 802.11N networking. It uses the Intel GL40 Express chipset with Intel GMA 4500M integrated graphics - a downgrade compared to ATI and NVIDIA integrated graphics. Battery life is listed as up to three hours. The current price of the Aspire AS5335-2238 is $448, so unless you really want an Intel processor and 802.11N networking we would look elsewhere. If you want a bigger laptop with a 1440x900 LCD, the Toshiba 17" Satellite L355-S7905 uses the same chipset/CPU combination and comes with 3GB RAM (and a 160GB hard drive, 802.11G WiFi, and lower battery life) for the same price.
All of the system so far have been single-core processors, which were all the rage until about four years ago. It's true that you can still get by with a single-core system, but if we switch to dual-core CPUs we get quite a few other upgrades in the process. The Acer 15.4" AS5536-5883 builds around the AMD Athlon 64 X2 QL-64 (dual-core, 65nm, 2.1GHz, 2x512KB L2, 3600MHz HyperTransport), which is essentially two Sempron SI-42 processors. It uses the AMD RS780MN chipset with integrated ATI Radeon HD 3200 graphics. You also get 3GB RAM, a 320GB 5400RPM hard drive, DVDRW, 802.11N, Gigabit Ethernet, a webcam, and up to three hours battery life. The operating system also receives an upgrade to Windows Vista Home Premium 32-bit, with a free upgrade to Windows 7 Premium Edition when that begins shipping. This laptop costs over 50% more ($478) than the $300 special, but it does provide quite several meaningful upgrades and it's definitely worth a look.
Our Intel dual-core offering from Wal-Mart is the Toshiba Satellite L305-S5961, which barely manages to squeak into our $500 price limit (also available at Buy.com for $480). Similar to the above AMD system, you get a few other upgrades like Windows Vista Home Premium with a free Windows 7 update. In other areas the comparison definitely favors AMD. The Intel Pentium T4200 (dual-core, 45nm, 1MB shared L2, 2.00GHz, 800MHz FSB) is a fair match for the Athlon X2 QL-64; Intel has the process technology advantage but both chips still specify 35W TDP. [Ed: Yes, I know TDP is not 100% comparable between AMD and Intel, but bear with me.] You only get 2GB RAM, the Intel GL40 Express Chipset/GMA 4500M chipset/IGP combination, a 250GB HDD, and 802.11G. Battery life isn't listed but we would guess it's somewhere between two and three hours maximum - similar to the Acer system. For the price, AMD definitely has the advantage right now in inexpensive laptops.
40 Comments
View All Comments
gobaers - Wednesday, July 29, 2009 - link
Please, do yourself a favor and never order anything from TigerDirect. I regret the day that I ordered something from them, because I've been deluged with spam ever since. It was the most expensive $5 savings ever.I think AnandTech should do its readers a service and not include them as a retailer in these articles.
JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 29, 2009 - link
I use Thunderbird, and their spam filtering works great. I get about 20 spam email messages per day (including some from TigerDirect, though they're not daily). They're automatically deleted for me.frozentundra123456 - Wednesday, July 29, 2009 - link
Sorry, just looked at the best buy site again. The 399.00 laptop was an HP, not Dell, but the specs I listed were correct. Anyway, still a good name brand.frozentundra123456 - Wednesday, July 29, 2009 - link
I dont know if either of them is in stock, but Best Buy has two really cheap laptops listed in their ad this week.1. For 299.00 they list a Toshiba single core celeron, 2gb ram and Vista Basic.
2. For 399.00 they list a Dell dual core pentium, 4gb of ram, and Vista premium.
These are prices that people used to stand in line on Black Friday to get.
MODEL3 - Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - link
Thanks Jarred,Otherwise, my friend would killed me if he found out that my advice cost him 100$ more for zero performance inprovement
MODEL3 - Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - link
Since the 2,2Ghz Pentium4(A)supports multi-threading I correct:I meant in real life applications that support multi-threaded tasks, otherwise for single-threaded applications the Athlon 64 3500+ should be nearly always faster than 2X.
MODEL3 - Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - link
When i said:and N280 is not faster overall than a 2,2Ghz Pentium4(A) (it is a little bit faster in some thing but also a little bit slower in others (something like +20%/-20%)
I meant in real life applications that support multi-threaded tasks, otherwise for single-threaded applications the 2,2Ghz Pentium4(A) should be nearly always faster.
So I think that the labeling of "2X faster" of Athlon 64 3500+ in real life applications is better characterization.
I'm just guessing, I am not sure (maybe in a future review will see what a Atom N280 can do)
JarredWalton - Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - link
I did a little bit more research and http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=91&a...">came up with this from Anand's Bench testing of Atom 330 and P4 660. Needless to say, twice as fast is probably far more accurate than 30%, and it's probably even more lopsided once we look at N280. I've updated the first page with this information.MODEL3 - Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - link
Sorry just asking becauce I recommended to a friend of mine not to bother with 200-300 euro netbooks based on Atom CPUs but instead to buy something like HP 550 (300 euro) or Acer Extensa 5630Z (400 euro)Since a 64 3500+ is like something a Pentium 4 650 (3,4Ghz) or even faster than a Pentium 4 660 in some things (like games) and a 650 has nearly 2x the power of a 2,2Ghz Pentium4(A),
and N280 is not faster overall than a 2,2Ghz Pentium4(A) (it is a little bit faster in some thing but also a little bit slower in others)
Shouldn't the 3500+ has 2X the power of N280?
JarredWalton - Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - link
It was a very conservative estimate based off of multi-threaded workloads where the Atom's Hyper-Threading can help. In single-threaded tasks the old Athlon 64 is likely more than twice the performance of an Atom. Without anything concrete to test I didn't want to go too far.