E-350 = Core 2 duo?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 217897
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 217897

Guest
What do you guys think CPU performance between the two? Was thinking of getting a laptop with an E-350 and wanted to see how to compares to my old core2 duo and 'core2 duo based, Pentium dual core' laptops
 
What will be the main purpose of the laptop? Surfing, no gaming, etc?

My E350 system is pretty fast for its price/power consumption...
I can surf the web, play 720p and 1080p (after tweaking it) videos w/o any problems...
 
Well, as far as I know, the E-350 is about as fast as the lowest clocked Intel Core 2 Duo ULV processors. That of course does not take the E-350's awesome (compared to the old Intel stuff from Core 2 times, as well as ION 2) IGP into account. Bottom line is: Any mid-level Core 2 Duo mobile + a small dedicated GPU is going to run circles around an E-350.

If you want more than very good Netbook performance, I suggest you go the i3 route.
 
I've seen buddies gaming with the HD3000 graphics and it runs Ages of Empires Online pretty well. CPU wise I'm pretty sure the C2D will run circles around the E350. Graphics is almost a wash, but haven't played with the 6200/6300 series. I have played with the HD4250 and I'd say the HD3000 is faster, but it's much better than Intel's old Integrated Graphics.
 
DSee said:
What will be the main purpose of the laptop? Surfing, no gaming, etc?

My E350 system is pretty fast for its price/power consumption...
I can surf the web, play 720p and 1080p (after tweaking it) videos w/o any problems...
Click to expand...

Normal usage. Not really gaming. Just dont' want lag which I get with my Atom books when opening up programs(office, outlook, Browsing, flash- you tube, etc.)
 
Chibo said:
Then put an SSD in it.
Click to expand...

Even ssd equipped atom netbooks will lag with this stuff- my 11.6" atom based netbook lags with browsing. It has a 64gb V100+ and 2GB of ram, along with a fresh install of W7. Not that it is unbearable, but unfortunately an SSD isn't a heal-all for atom based netbooks. I am ditching mine for a C-50 equipped one.
 
Dosobye said:
What do you guys think CPU performance between the two? Was thinking of getting a laptop with an E-350 and wanted to see how to compares to my old core2 duo and 'core2 duo based, Pentium dual core' laptops
Click to expand...

I tried one. took it back. for windows 7 its just not sufficient (to me) Linux box probably. but that is it. def not as fast as a core two.
 
shrug, I have a different experience with the e-350. My sister picked one up in the 11.6 in HP netbook, because she wanted something super-small before returning to school. And as I really wanted to support my sister in going back to school, I set it up for her.

It's not a powerhouse, but I'll be damned if it didn't feel faster and snappier then her other laptop (a 17" beast that doesn't leave the desk).

Raw spec wise, the 17" is a much faster laptop (gen 1 i5), but the little 350 felt faster in and around windows. I hadn't cleaned her 17" in a while, so I cleaned/reoptimized it at the same time, and the little e-350 finished most things as fast, or faster.

It's ancedotal, I didn't benchmark the thing, but it "felt" faster. The "windows experience" score was the same, though the 17" was held back by the graphics, while the e-350 was held back by the CPU.

I'm seriously considering picking up a SATA3 SSD for my MBP, and installing the Vertex in her little netbook.

Considering she spent $450 on the thing, I was SERIOUSLY impressed with it. It's not a $800 laptop, but it is a netbook that didn't make me want to stab my eye's out.
 
you're talking about 2 different things, the CPU or x86 performance of the fusion chips is horrible but for just web browsing and playing media which uses GPU acceleration it is great. a C2D or cheap SB based Dual Pentium (B940) CPU/x86 power wise is MUCH MUCH faster than the E-350 and has hardware decoding support for 1080p playback fine. These go on sale for ~$300 quite frequently, almost every other week at Fry's.

The GPU performance of the E-350 is much better than the Intel counterparts but still not really fast enough to be a true gamer, so I would personally go the B940 route. I have the $299 Lenovo one from last week Fry's special and feels very fast for how cheap it was.
 
e350 is all around weak. The graphics power is also weaker than intel hd 2000/3000.
for the price, it falls behind all of intel's solutions.

$300 e350 vs $300 b940...
b940 hands down.
 
Yeah that sucks they are putting these chips in 15" notebooks.
 
shrug, as I said, it depends. I found the thing felt quite a bit faster then any core i3 laptop I have EVER played with, and I've played with quite a few.

Sure, raw spec's it looses, but actual usability, it wins.

It's not a high power machine, but it's not supposed to be. It IS supposed to be a netbook style laptop that isn't eye-gougingly slow, and it does that quite well.

Remember, in my sister's case, it's an 11.6" Netbook, that she gets' 7 hours out of, that weighs 3lbs, and yet is snappy enough to do everything she wants to do with it. And does it snappier then her 17" Corei5 beast, so much so that she's basically stopped using the 17".
 
it was not made to compete with the i3 it was made to compete with the atom sad thing is it is almost 1 year too late to actually compete with it properly

the one that is meant to compete with the i5 and i3 is llano the a4 a6 and a8 series chips...

so for under 400 a e350 e450 is about the best you can do unless an i3 is priced lower then all you need to do is get one with nvidia ion beacause intel graphics are still shit the 6250 on the c50 series processor runs circles around anything intel has graphics wise but it is bottle necked severely by the cpu and the shared memory bus.

The preformance of the e350 is very close to that of the single core amd 64 3000+

And the gpu is the best game in town as far as mobile gpu go without making the leap to a desktop replacement with a discrete gpu...
 
Lunas said:
so for under 400 a e350 e450 is about the best you can do unless an i3 is priced lower then all you need to do is get one with nvidia ion beacause intel graphics are still shit the 6250 on the c50 series processor runs circles around anything intel has graphics wise but it is bottle necked severely by the cpu and the shared memory bus.
.
Click to expand...

intel graphics now wipe the floor with radeon 6250 and 6310.
intel has more raw horsepower.



Zumino Zufeilon said:
shrug, as I said, it depends. I found the thing felt quite a bit faster then any core i3 laptop I have EVER played with, and I've played with quite a few.
".
Click to expand...

feels faster than an i3 ? Maybe the i3's you played with had a shitload of bloatware.

how could something with the power of an i3, with the same 5400rpm hdd, feel slower than an e350...
 
dr.kevin said:
intel graphics now wipe the floor with radeon 6250 and 6310.
intel has more raw horsepower.
Click to expand...
Umm what intel onboard has beaten them sandy bridge ones? Because nothing paired with an atom chip to date can touch them...
 
After much testing of my amd e-350 htpc I find that its about the equivalent performance of a mid range 2004 pc... ipc wise its about dead on against a 2000+ amd tbred and gpu wise its around 7600gs.

Overall it games about as well as my gaming rig from 2004.. axp mobile @ 2.5ghz with a fx5700le, 3dmark2001se score is about identical :eek:
 
Care to back this up? Or are you comparing AMD's low power alternative to the Intel Atom, to a Core i series with the new intel Graphics??? Because if so, your comparing two products that are not even ment to compete

dr.kevin said:
intel graphics now wipe the floor with radeon 6250 and 6310.
intel has more raw horsepower.
Click to expand...
 
Lunas said:
Umm what intel onboard has beaten them sandy bridge ones? Because nothing paired with an atom chip to date can touch them...
Click to expand...

W.Feather said:
Care to back this up? Or are you comparing AMD's low power alternative to the Intel Atom, to a Core i series with the new intel Graphics??? Because if so, your comparing two products that are not even ment to compete
Click to expand...


I am comparing similarly priced e-350 and b940 laptops.

radeon 6310 vs HD 2000/3000.

in store flyers, you always see them at the same price.
I am talking about b940 as an alternative to e350, even if the two were not designed to compete.
 
dr.kevin said:
I am comparing similarly priced e-350 and b940 laptops.

radeon 6310 vs HD 2000/3000.

The OP is talking about laptops, right ?
Click to expand...
The bobcat was never meant to compete with those the one that is meant to compete with that is llano. A4 A6 A8

Also in the benchmarks i looked into the hd2000 never beat the 6310 and the hd 3000 only sometimes beat it...

The op is comparing the e350 to the first gen core 2 duos personally i would not go with an e350 unless you are budgeted down below $350 and yeah i would probably go for a A6 based llano laptop or one of the sandy bridge ones as with either of them i would be able to play some games the e-350 will not play anything more than World of warcraft guild wars and many other 4-6 year old games my e350 has trouble playing Minecraft with the settings turned to the lowest setting...
 
^^ even though they are not in the same class, nbcheck shows the hd2000 stomping the 6250 and 6310.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-2000-100.37994.0.html

also, the sandy bridge ULV chips have hd3000.
yeah, still not direct competitors. e-350 is in its own niche.
but i'm just discussing it for comparison.

for the same price, you can either have weak cpu and better battery life, or vice versa.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I agree, doesnt really matter what something was meant to compete with, only matters what it is competing with.
 
W.Feather said:
Care to back this up? Or are you comparing AMD's low power alternative to the Intel Atom, to a Core i series with the new intel Graphics??? Because if so, your comparing two products that are not even ment to compete
Click to expand...

Not meant to compete ? What are the E and C series doing in 13 and 15" laptops ? Isn't that a clear overlap ? How many Atoms have you seen in 13 or bigger laptops ? For $100 more you get the same 15" laptop but with a i3 in it. Looks like a fair comparison.
 
savantu said:
Not meant to compete ? What are the E and C series doing in 13 and 15" laptops ? Isn't that a clear overlap ? How many Atoms have you seen in 13 or bigger laptops ? For $100 more you get the same 15" laptop but with a i3 in it. Looks like a fair comparison.
Click to expand...

because they wanted to make even more money off of people who dont want a netbook and i bought my 15.6 inch e-350 because i was going to get a netbook but saw this thing and went with a toshiba c650D 15.6 inch led backlit display i was going to get the acer aspire one 722 before i found this for 279...

I guess if i had looked into it more i might have gone with intel but intel has such a bad track record with onboard video that i just will not risk getting stuck with another gma based laptop that cant play shit let alone a game or 2 if intel bought nvidia amd would really be in trouble
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top