Back to Article

  • ltcommanderdata - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    I was under the impression that most Displayport ports can just be converted to DVI or HDMI using a passive dongle. Is this actually an uncommon feature? Admittedly, I don't remember seeing the DP++ logo advertised, although I've never really bothered to look for it. Reply
  • quiksilvr - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    Via Single-link DVI (1920x1200, 1920x1080) that is correct. However, if you want higher resolutions, you need an active converter. This, I believe, is the biggest fault of Displayport. Reply
  • piroroadkill - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    With a piss-weak CPU. Surely both should be able to boost up to a fixed total TDP level.. Come on AMD! Reply
  • damianrobertjones - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    I wouldn't call it 'piss-weak'. I'd call a single core Atom weak but with a nice SSD the C50 in the Acer W500 does well. Reply
  • piroroadkill - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    OK, I'm not saying it's useless. Obviously a single core Atom is hopeless:- I'm simply saying that surely turbo-core on the CPU would prove more useful - this isn't exactly a gaming platform, and I'm sure the CPU will get taxed far more often than the GPU in normal usage. Reply
  • yuchai - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    I'm a E-350 user and I agree with you. Who really buy these CPUs for gaming anyway? Heck, for people who do Flash games (which I'd argue people buying this is more likely to play anyway) you'd want a more power CPU. Reply
  • Wierdo - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    Flash is now GPU accelerated, some tests I saw showed CPU utilization drop from 90 to 20 percent using GPUs instead of CPUs, I think this is the direction things are headed. Reply
  • Thunder1950 - Sunday, June 09, 2013 - link

    Is that why I can't use Abode Flash Player on my Lap Top ? Reply
  • ET - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    Me and many others buy these for gaming. Anyone who wants a light, inexpensive laptop that can run some games. Older games run okay, and I tried Everquest II and City of Heroes on my Thinkpad X120e, and both are reasonably playable (not great) at native resolution.

    A slight increase in clocks might be just what's needed to make borderline playable into playable.
  • oceanrock - Tuesday, August 23, 2011 - link

    so i have two acer laptops one with E350 and one with i3-2310...

    to my surprise, the E350 system provides smoother, albeit, slower operation. it was a real surprise to me.

    maybe its the intel drivers? maybe its the different power saving modes? but for a 100 dollars less and a netbook-class processor the E350 system is more enjoyable for daily operation!
  • sinigami - Wednesday, August 24, 2011 - link

    for giggles, would you mind comparing your E350 against your 2310m, on this small Java benchmark?

    sorry for asking more than one person, just scared that no one will even notice or read my plea...
  • sinigami - Wednesday, August 24, 2011 - link

    sorry to bother you, but i'm going crazy wishing i could find someone that would report their E-350 score for a little Java science benchie...

    would you mind taking a second to hit up and tell us what your thinkpad scores?

    it runs inside your browsers JVM.

    seems all browsers show the same performance, so it is browser agnostic.
  • sinigami - Wednesday, August 24, 2011 - link

    i do java on the move... completely curious how the E-350 does java... can you or someone please run NIST's small java scimark?

    use pulldown to select "Show Table" to see the overall score.

  • DanNeely - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    In single threaded tasks the E350 is about 50% faster than the atom, it's overall performance is slightly ahead of the D510 dual core 4 thread atom. With a 36% turbo the E450 should be able to burst to ~2.2x as fast on single threaded tasks giving it a large edge in user world apps.
  • Arnulf - Tuesday, August 23, 2011 - link

    But it is 'piss-weak', considering its rather high TDP (now to be utilized to the max.) and not-so-high IPC rate combined with very modest clockspeed.

    Assume there was a way for AMD to "fuse" two of these together to get a 4-core, 160 SP Brazos chip with a TDP of 38W. How would such an imaginary chip fare against say SB i5 2500T (TDP of 45W) ? Graphics would likely be on par while it would get soundly trashed in CPU and memory performance amd Intel's notes regarding 22 nm process node and its power consumption indicate that cherry-picked desktop IB should be capable of beating Brazos at its own game, the low power consumption.
  • fishman - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    I picked up an Acer 722 netbook on friday. It came with the AMD C-60 (it was advertised to have the C-50), so it is already available. Reply
  • OS - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    i got one of those Acers also, its kind of a lobsided system, the gpu is pretty powerful but the cpu less so. Reply
  • Quad_Tube - Wednesday, July 16, 2014 - link

    My thoughts entirely. I've been fixing a client's laptop with one of these C-60 APUs and despite the cheap price he paid for it my overall impression is very mixed. Not good because generally I'm very pleased with AMD's offerings, but the performance of lap-tops based on this APU will be hampered on several levels, and where it gains in certain areas it loses miserably in others.

    For one, the decent GPU is fused with two fairly weak CPU cores that will suffer from everything but light workloads. Their performance per clock is far below AMD Athlon II. This wouldn't matter so much if all software was designed to accelerate functions on a GPU, but as we all know this isn't happening. Hence the reason CPU architectures have evolved because there still a large reliance on that x86 architecture. The Bobcat die just isn't strong enough.

    This performance deficit is further compounded by the fact most Laptop manufacturers pre-install added applications and other assorted junk, which ultimately slows a machine down. On a C-60 based machine this can not only slow it down but make it a complete nightmare to use. So the only realistic option is to try and install your own copy of Windows and have done with it.

    Thirdly, AMD's drivers seem to be a bit of resource hog. I see several services running in the background, which don't seem to make any allowance for the fact these APU's need to conserve power and need to be light on resources. In contrast nVidia's stuff seems to be much simpler.

    Historically I've chosen and recommended AMD to clients because in my opinion the bang-per-buck spoke for itself. A very capable quad-core CPU that can over-clock like a charm, and all for a low price? Super-duper. But having used this particular APU I'm left dismayed. For despite employing every trick in the book in terms of system optimization I'm left wanting; it's infuriating to have to wait for Opera to load, or to open the Control panel and add/remove programs. This on a laptop that has been stripped as much as possible until the only other option is to re-install a standard version of Windows. And even then, my guess is I'd be found wanting. It's a pity, since it's clear the GPU side is pretty decent; I had no problems watching 1080p video on WMP and using around 20% CPU resources..and all that on a 9 watt APU. It's clear the image quality is crisp, vibrant and stable (for the most part).

    So all in all you're left frustrated unless you run a very specific set of applications: older games, watching films or typing letters. Trying to use Opera to watch You Tube video's is problematic. Trying to squeeze performance from every nook and cranny is tiresome. You need a decent CPU to run Windows 7 effectively, regardless of whether or not third-party applications can be accelerated on the GPU. And therein lies the problem: despite everything it has, despite everything it offers, the C-60 still has to call upon the CPU architecture to do the grunt of the work, and it is simply not powerful enough.

    Once I re-install Windows how I like it I'll re-assess the situation, but having read the reviews I doubt I'll get to the point where I'd recommend this APU. Not this one, not in this state. AMD can do a lot better but they're cut back far too much.
  • zeo - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    Should point out that AMD Turbo Core works by over clocking one core but under clocks the other to balance out the power usage. So only the GPU will be getting a full over clock. While the CPU will only boost single core operations.

    While the feature is also similar to Intel's Turbo Boost. So only active when the system thinks it needs it and may be effected by system heat levels for duration time of the boost.
  • ET - Monday, August 22, 2011 - link

    It would be interesting to see how well this works out in practice. The C-60 can be considerably better than the C-50, at least on paper, so let's hope also in practice. Reply
  • parkerm35 - Thursday, September 01, 2011 - link

    At the moment they are using 40nm fab, can you imagine how good these things will become when they switch to 28nm, which is just months away!!! Reply
  • fteoath64 - Wednesday, September 07, 2011 - link

    They cannot even bump the clock speed to 2Ghz (or better still 2.4Ghz) and put 160 gpu cores in there. I would not call the E450 an update maybe it should be named E350-2 instead!. What a huge disappointment!. Reply
  • SCComega - Thursday, October 06, 2011 - link

    Umm... isn't that the A4 series? Or haven't you paid attention to the rest of the AMD fusion line.

    For a netbook processor, the E450 is pretty darn fast. If you want that speed, go up to the A4/6/8.
  • thebeastie - Wednesday, February 15, 2012 - link

    So does the eSata port from this intergrated Soc have built in eSata port multiplier/FIS support or bloody what?
    What about 'AMD-Vi/IOMMU/VT-d so I might be able to run a decently fast mini virtual server?

    Hate it when there is never any real detail.
  • Thunder1950 - Sunday, June 09, 2013 - link

    Can anyone tell me why Abode Flash Player wont work with my AMD E-450 APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics in my HP Lap-Top ? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now