The Price Showdown

ASUS was very clever with the pricing of the A3TB7A-I. These days a Zotac Ion with an Atom 330 will set you back $169.99 without a power supply or $189.99 with the external DC power adapter. ASUS decided to undercut Zotac by $10 and is coming in at $159.99:

  Price
ASRock Ion 330 $379.99
ASUS AT3B7A-I $159.99
Zotac IONITX-A-U $189.99
Zotac IONITX-D-E $169.99

 

The third option, the ASRock Ion, is more difficult to compare as you get a lot more in the bundle. To see what the most affordable way into an Ion would be (assuming you don’t already have any components) I priced out barebones systems using the ASRock, ASUS and Zotac routes:

  ASUS AT3B7A-I ASRock Ion 330 Zotac IONITX-A-U
Base Price (Motherboard + Accessories) $159.99 $379.99 $189.99
2x1GB DDR2-800 $29.98 Included $29.98
Mini ITX Case + PSU $38.99 - $49.99 Included $38.99 - $49.99
Seagate 320GB 5400.6 2.5" HDD $69.99 Included $69.99
Internal DVD Slim Drive $34.99 Included $34.99
Total $333.94 - $344.94 $379.99 $363.94 - $374.94

 

Curious. The Zotac would win the price comparison if it weren’t for one thing: even the cheapest mini-ITX case at Newegg comes with a power supply. So the $189.99 Zotac board with power supply doesn’t save you any money, you just end up with an extra mini-ITX PSU after you’re done with your build. Naturally you could opt for the PSU-less $169.99 model, but then ASUS has already got you beat on price by $10. The one thing I didn’t include is the cost of a WiFi dongle, because you do get WiFi with Zotac but not with ASUS.

Depending on how much you spend on a mini-ITX case, the ASUS AT3N7A-I will get you into an Ion system for around $40 less than the ASRock Ion 330. That’s not an insignificant amount of money, and something you could use to beef up some of the components. Ahem, SSD.

Who wins the price comparison? The newcomer ASUS, unless you want WiFi in which case the $169.99 Zotac IONITX-D-E is a better deal. The cheapest USB 802.11n dongle will set you back around $20, making the ASUS solution $10 more expensive.

Sidebar: ASRock Ion 330 Determining the Speed of an Atom
Comments Locked

61 Comments

View All Comments

  • Titanius - Friday, August 28, 2009 - link

    "While Acer offers the Aspire Revo, it only comes with a single-core Atom 230, a far less desirable option."

    What about the Acer Aspire Revo R3600? It has an Intel Atom 330, a 160GB HD and 2 GB of Dual-Channel RAM. Check it out: http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=41924&a...">http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?...&man...
  • Fietsventje - Friday, August 28, 2009 - link

    A pitty, no network interface benchmarks. Despite the overkill of the nVidia GPU, these boards would make the ideal start of a limited home server, and transferring files at gigabit speeds is no small feat for such a small processor ...
  • mgrier - Friday, August 28, 2009 - link

    Do you have data to support this? Between DMA both to the drive and the NIC and TCP checksum offloading, the CPU overhead of disk transfers should be minimal with an operating system and drivers that support all of the above. Assuming a single drive configuration, you should mostly be limited by transfer rate of the drive for large files. For smaller files, you should be limited by the drive's seek latency.
  • JarredWalton - Saturday, August 29, 2009 - link

    I'm not so sure it's the HDD CPU overhead so much as network drivers. I'd imaging these Atom CPUs could use a good 30-50% of the CPU for doing Gb transfers. However, as you are limited by the HDD to a maximum ~50MBps (unless you go SSD or at least a 7200RPM drive), you should probably only need 15-25% of the CPU. Would be interesting to see the results though. At least the Ion systems give you GbE, unlike all the netbooks I've tested.
  • cliffman - Friday, August 28, 2009 - link

    I am interested in seeing the performance of a mini-itx board that can support a quad core system. You can build a modern system for $500 instead of paying $350 for an atom system.
  • MadMan007 - Sunday, August 30, 2009 - link

    Considering those use any one of the regular LGA775 (atm - maybe we'll see some LGA1156 mITX boards) chipsets unless the board is just done poorly the performance would be the same as a full system with the same chipset and CPU. You'd just have the obvious tradeoff of expansion and possibly overclocking/enthusiast features.
  • plext0r - Friday, August 28, 2009 - link

    You mention the Acer Aspire Revo on the last page. Any word when and if Acer will release this box in the US? A single-core 230 is plenty of CPU horsepower for XBMC or MythTV when using Nvidia's binary drivers. Thanks!
  • strikeback03 - Friday, August 28, 2009 - link

    Hey, finally an Atom board with analog connections for more channels. Maybe I'll eventually replace the LF2 board in my carputer with this (and just keep the Scythe fan I already have).
  • gipper - Friday, August 28, 2009 - link

    Why in the world can't people just use bigger fixtures and bigger fans?

    It's like the xbox 360. Who cares if it's smaller than my receiver, it's A FREAKING JET ENGINE. Why can't they just bump the size up a bit and throw in a 120mm fan?

    With these, what's wrong with bumping up the chasis to xbox1 size and going with a slower 80mm fan which will probably deliver more air flow at 800rpm than these 40mm fans at 6500rpm.

    I can't believe that project leaders haven't caught on to this issue yet. They must have their quality assurance guys working in different rooms than the products they're testing, or they're testing them in the middle of the factory.
  • Abby - Wednesday, September 2, 2009 - link

    For Manufacturing, Transportation and profits wise, small is da key.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now