Most people know that Intel’s Atom is a slow, low-cost processor. But does it even offer enough performance to take it beyond desktop processors nearly a decade old? Today we're comparing a modern Atom CPU to two Northwood-class Pentium 4-based PCs.
We were sorting out some old hardware in one of our test labs and wondered what to do with our old Socket 478 Pentium 4 gear. Disposing of it doesn’t feel quite right, and we know that many Pentium 4 systems remain in service. Clock speeds between 2 GHz and 3.4 GHz still provide sufficient performance for a home server or backup PC, so why not put up two different Pentium 4 systems against single-core and dual-core Atom solutions to see how today’s low-cost computing solutions hold up?
Convenience Computing
We done several articles dealing with Atom and comparing its performance and efficiency with other solutions. First and foremost, it’s important to note that Atom is not in the same market segment as desktop-oriented Core 2, Core ix, Phenom, or Athlon processors. Atoms enable the lowest-cost netbooks and nettop computers. They aren’t meant to be particularly efficient, and they won’t satisfy a power user. Any entry-level Core i3 desktop will provide many times better power efficiency, in fact.
Atom makes sense where local computing performance doesn’t matter very much: browsing the Internet, communicating via email or social networks, and processing documents and spreadsheets. For these, Atom is more than enough.
Buy Atom or Recycle P4?
Does it make more sense to purchase a cheap Atom-based computer or to recycle and/or continue to use an existing Pentium 4 machine? Both run at decent clock speeds and come with 512 KB of L2 cache. Both can be considered above average if you have modest performance expectations. And both have a comparable transistor count: 55 million for the Pentium 4 (based on the Northwood design) and 47 millions for the Atom 230.
More importantly, you might be able to get an older P4 system for very little money from a friend or business upgrading to newer hardware. We compare the Atom 230 and D510 to a Pentium 4 (Northwood) 2.2 and 3.2 GHz.
- Can Atom Beat A Pentium 4?
- Oldie But Goldie: Intel Pentium 4 (Northwood)
- Better Than Its Reputation? Intel's Atom
- Test Systems And 3DMark Vantage
- Benchmark Results: Synthetics
- Benchmark Results: Applications
- Benchmark Results: Audio/Video
- Benchmark Results: Power Consumption
- Benchmark Results: Efficiency
- Conclusion
I am about to buy a new 'main' workstation, upgrading from my old (and well loved) Pentium D 3.4Ghz.
Therefore, I am currently debating if I should keep the old beast as a home server/torrent/etc machine or buy something like the Tranquil T7D (http://www.tranquilpc-shop.co.uk/acatalog/T7-D_PC_SYSTEMS.html).
Clearly the Pentium D would perform better than the P4-HT chip tested here as it has two physical cores, but in the long run, I would be using a lot more power (particularly as the machine would be running 24/7).
Also, it would be nice to see some timings for Windows Media Center transcoding a recorded program to DVD - comparisons of different platforms and versions of Windows (I have Vista Home Premium, but will go with Windows 7 if I ever get around to upgrading).
That sums it all.
Never thought I'd read about the P4 in 2010
Now in 10 years a review on Toms might just say the Core i7 is a massive slow beast compared to the new hotness.
Great little comparison!
1) The newer atoms are significantly better than the first generation largely due to the new chipset, though I'm disappointed not to see the 410 included in this comparison.
2) Even an aging low performance graphics processor makes a huge difference compared to integratged graphics used by intel even now, if you look at the bench marks that include graphics the pentium system raced ahead. Also as gamesmachine points out, the Ion set up for Atom greatly improves it's performance and usability, most of us watch a great deal of videos and our desktop experiences even for the most casual user are still graphically intensive. I fail to see why Intel hasn't caught onto this.
As for the Pentium 4, if it does what you want, fair play to you. No disgrace in making the most of what you have, is there? At the time I went the AMD Athlon64 route, due to its stronger core and less concerns over power; I still remember friend's motherboard struggling to run a 'Prescott' P4. The noise and heat were just too much.
I still run some of these older systems myself, mostly AMD . Some have ran almost 24/7..well beyond the expected life-span of their individual components. Spare PSU fans and discarded DDR memory come in very handy
With a couple of gigs of RAM, a dual-core CPU and a PCI-E card I older hardware like this to be surprisingly capable, right down to native USB 2.0 and S-ATA support. Even if they aren't exactly shining examples of energy efficiency, you can always enable features like Cool 'n' Quiet, etc.
i was pleasantly surprised when i saw the Pentium 4 logo on it, and even though it only had half a gig of ram i was able to sail through the fix. These chips are a godsend, the P4 was a wee beastie compared to it's predecessor.