DivX 8.5.3 with Xmpeg 5.0.3

Our DivX test is the same DivX / XMpeg 5.03 test we've run for the past few years now, the 1080p source file is encoded using the unconstrained DivX profile, quality/performance is set balanced at 5 and enhanced multithreading is enabled:

DivX 6.8.5 w/ Xmpeg 5.0.3 - MPEG-2 to DivX Transcode

DivX encoding performance improved by around 9%, definitely tangible and definitely worth waiting for if you're ready to buy a new Atom based system.

x264 HD Video Encoding Performance

Graysky's x264 HD test uses the publicly available x264 codec (open source alternative to H.264) to encode a 4Mbps 720p MPEG-2 source. The focus here is on quality rather than speed, thus the benchmark uses a 2-pass encode and reports the average frame rate in each pass.

x264 HD Encode Benchmark - 720p MPEG-2 to x264 Transcode

x264 HD Encode Benchmark - 720p MPEG-2 to x264 Transcode

 

Windows Media Encoder 9 x64 Advanced Profile

In order to be codec agnostic we've got a Windows Media Encoder benchmark looking at the same sort of thing we've been doing in the DivX and x264 tests, but using WME instead.

Windows Media Encoder 9 x64 - Advanced Profile Transcode

Pine Trail holds a 9% advantage over the older Atom 330 in our Windows Media Encoder test.

SYSMark & Photoshop Performance 3D Rendering Performance
Comments Locked

41 Comments

View All Comments

  • Jeffk464 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - link

    This might be a decent solution with the broadcom media chip making it capable of playing HD content and hopefully flash media.
  • dealcorn - Monday, December 21, 2009 - link

    If I am reading correctly the Intel platform with Broadcom media accelerator (about $25) is cheaper than the Ion platform and will consume less energy. Some relevant perfortmance testing may help determine whether the Intel platform is positioned to dominate the frugal HTPC market.

    It is a bummer that you will need to spend chump change for a SATA port card to enable software raid 5 for a frugal media server.

    Likely, the incremental performance improvements are adequate for Intel to maintain its cachet in the dissed, real world netbook market with its surprisingly large volumes.

    Its kinda a nothing platform, but in context may be a home run.
  • Jeffk464 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - link

    For it to be a solution for me it needs to be on a mobo that has a pcie slot and hdmi through the broadcom chip. I'm not to hopeful though, will probably end up with a i3 solution. Too bad, I like the idea of going super low wattage.
  • psychobriggsy - Monday, December 21, 2009 - link

    The platform is standing still apart from getting more integrated. Hopefully that will mean cheaper. Maybe some netbooks will get cheaper, but otherwise the platform is a complete waste of time because of the lack of HD video capability (for Intel to call the graphics "HD Graphics" is verging on consumer misrepresentation, it can't even do 1080p output via HDMI/DVI, what is this, 2005?).

    Why did the review concentrate on benchmarks of applications nobody would run on such a system?

    These chips are a solution for nothing apart from the unwealthy Office user who needs 8 hours of battery instead of 6.
  • Jeffk464 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - link

    It can be used for a low power/cost network storage device.
  • Zool - Monday, December 21, 2009 - link

    There could be a test with underclocked and undervolted E5300 against the Atom D510. Maybe Power vs performance would be quite close if not better for the E5300. I think that everyone could take another 10W for a performance thats not crapy (even netbooks).
  • Calin - Monday, December 21, 2009 - link

    10 more watts would mean going from 8-9 hours of socket-free operation down to 6 (or maybe less). Not acceptable for the people that want 8 hours of socket-free operation. As for higher performance CPU, you have the low voltage processors (CULV), which will better fit the bill.
  • Zool - Monday, December 21, 2009 - link

    Thing is that 10+ more wats in CPU doesnt mean that u use it all the time. For internet browsing and so (not like u can use it efectivly for something more) the cpu isnt working 100% all the time just sporadicly.
    Majority of the power usage in those scenarios is in the rest of the hardware like display ,gpu, mainboard which runs all the time.
    And i dont even say that with faster cpu the task are faster done so u use the cpu on 100% state less time in total.

    Atom is the only one of its kind now and without competition it will stay this crapy for long time.
  • cjs150 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - link

    There are 3 markets for this type of product: notebooks, HTPC and cheap file servers:

    HTPC market: complete failure because the graphics are not up to scratch

    Cheap file server: only SATA ports but I could add my raid card to this but the given the cost it would be cheaper to buy a NAS box

    Notebooks: barely adequate - word processing and simple internet browsing only.

    So for 2 out of 3 markets it is a waste of space and the 3rd market it is merely sub-par what is already out there
  • Jeffk464 - Monday, December 21, 2009 - link

    Don't give up yet, mobo manufacturers have the option to put a broadcom media chip on their boards. I don't know if this will come with HDMI though. Have to wait and see.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now