Ion netbooks head-to-head: Atom, overcharged?
By Joanna Stern 
posted December 30th 2009 3:30PM
posted December 30th 2009 3:30PM
The Contenders
 |
ASUS Eee PC 1201N ($499.99)
|
 |
Lenovo IdeaPad S12 ($649.00)
|
 |
HP Mini 311 ($474.99)
|
 |
Samsung N510 ($599.99)
|
Round 1: Design
When it comes to aesthetics, the Lenovo, Samsung and ASUS all closely resemble their smaller netbook siblings, and their glossy, fingerprint-loving lids and black matte keyboards decks exude a pseudo-professional look. The Lenovo's light circular dot pattern gives it some difference, but overall all three look quite similar. We did appreciate the small differences though, like the tear drop power button nestled on the Samsung's hinge, and the pearl-like decoration on the Lenovo. But it's really HP that manages to hit on both portability and design. We really liked the Mini 311's subtle, swirly pattern on its white lid and the contrasting silver keyboard and palmrest. And as fingerprint-smudged lids really drive us nuts, it didn't hurt that the lid didn't leave any traces of our slimy hands.
Round 2: Keyboard, touchpad and screen
All the touchpads were comfortable. But HP continues to have an Achilles heel when it comes touchpads: the Mini 311's pad is positioned too close to the keyboard, and when we typed our palm repeatedly moved the cursor to a different location on the screen. Because you can't turn the touchpad off, we did figure out how best to angle our hands, but it was quite peeving. Both the Samsung and ASUS have multitouch pads, and we're happy to report two finger scrolling worked fine, although the single mouse buttons were lame and we preferred to double tap. In the end, Lenovo's wide pad and firm, dedicated right and left buttons provided the best all-around experience.
While the ASUS and Lenovo have 12.1-inch displays, HP and Samsung went with smaller 11.6-inchers -- though they're really not noticeably smaller to the naked eye. Lenovo's screen has a 1200 x 800 resolution, but the rest have 1366x768 resolutions, which makes viewing HD content crisp and clear. However, the glare caused by the glossy screens on the ASUS, Lenovo and HP is extremely noticeable and results in poor horizontal viewing angles when trying to share the screen with a friend. We did, however, take a liking to the viewing angles on the Samsung N510's matte screen, and the fact that we didn't have to look at our reflection every time the screen turned dark in a game or video. Though Samsung's screen was better in terms of pure quality, this round still goes to Lenovo for superb ergonomics.
Round 3: Overall performance
Okay, here's the big surprise. Though NVIDIA says Ion should have no impact on everyday performance, the Samsung, HP and the Lenovo felt slower than other Atom N270 and N280 netbooks we've tested. Though it's not really reflected in the benchmarks, we noticed it taking longer for the machines to open programs, and when working in Firefox with a handful of tabs they just lagged more than others. In an informal stopwatch test it took the Lenovo and Samsung 2.5 seconds to open Firefox with no other programs running, while it took the standard N280-based HP Mini 5101 1 second. Similarly, it took the Lenovo 8 seconds, the Samsung 6 seconds to open the same 1.5MB PDF in Adobe Acrobat 9, while both the standard HP Mini 5101 and the next-gen Atom N450-based Eee PC 1005PE opened it in 3 seconds flat.
So while Ion promised better performance, these netbooks feel more sluggish in everyday tasks. And though we've heard theories trying to explain it -- including Liliputing's about increased screen resolution causing more strain on the CPU -- all we actually know is that these results are disappointing. Sure, all these laptops will capably handle your web surfing and light application needs, but the inescapable fact is that a netbook which costs $200 less will probably do it faster.
| PDF Open Times | GIMP Open Times | |
| ASUS Eee PC 1201N (Win 7 SE) | 3.5 sec | 21 sec |
| HP Mini 311 (XP) | 5 sec | 24 sec |
| Lenovo IdeaPad S12 (Win 7 SE) | 8 sec |
42 sec |
| Samsung N510 | 6 sec | 33 sec |
| ASUS Eee PC 1005PE (Intel Atom N450)* | 3 sec | 21 sec |
| HP Mini 5101 (Intel Atom N280)* | 3 sec | 20 sec |
*Standard Intel Atom configuration
The HP, Lenovo and Samsung all may come equipped with standard, single-core Atom processors, but the Eee PC 1201N's dual-core 1.66GHz Atom N330 processor showed no hurt. And as we mentioned in our full review of the 1201N, it felt much snappier in everyday use than any of the N270 or N280 Atom netbooks we've tested, and the benchmark chart below echoes that.
| GeekBench | PCMark05 | |
| ASUS Eee PC 1201N (Win 7 SE) | 1106 | 2208 |
| HP Mini 311 (XP) | 957 | 2016 |
| Lenovo IdeaPad S12 (Win 7 SE) | 833 | 1394 |
| Samsung N510 | 883 | 1799 |
| ASUS Eee PC 1005PE (Intel Atom N450) | 942 | 1431 |
| HP Mini 5101 (Intel Atom N280) | 920 | 1650 |
Round 4: Graphics and HD performance
Graphics and multimedia performance, on the other hand, blew us away -- Ion undoubtedly provides better multimedia handling, even if it's at the expense of everyday performance. All four of the netbooks were able to play a Blu-ray clip at a full 1080p resolution, smoothly stream a YouTube 1080p clip with Flash 10.1 installed, and handle some mainstream games -- all things we couldn't do with the HP Mini 5101 or the Pine Trail-powered MSI Wind U135. But as you'd expect, the Eee PC 1201N's stronger CPU helped it to notch better benchmarks and framerates than the other systems. Playing Batman: Arkham Asylum at 1024 x 768 resolution was noticeably speedier on the ASUS than with the Lenovo IdeaPad S12.
| 3DMark06 | WoW (FPS)* | |
| ASUS Eee PC 1201N (Win 7 SE) | 1555 | 30 |
| HP Mini 311 (XP) | 1464 | 29 |
| Lenovo IdeaPad S12 (Win 7 SE) | 1243 | 21 |
| Samsung N510 | 1271 | 25 |
| ASUS Eee PC 1005PE | 157 | --- |
| HP Mini 5101 | 128 | --- |
* World of Warcraft frames per second measured in native resolution
Quick note: the Samsung N510 and HP Mini 311 have an Ion LE chipset. The only difference between LE and regular Ion is that the LE version disables support for DirectX10, but if you're up for the challenge you could always try and hack it.
Round 5: Battery life
| Battery Life on video rundown | |
| ASUS Eee PC 1201N (Win 7 SE) | 2:26:00 |
| HP Mini 311 (XP) | 3:53:00 |
| Lenovo IdeaPad S12 (Win 7 SE) | 2:40:00 |
| Samsung N510 | 3:20:00 |
| ASUS Eee PC 1005PE | 8:10:00 |
| HP Mini 5101 | 5:45:00 |
NVIDIA claims that Ion has minimal effects on battery life; we'd beg to differ. Despite the fact that each netbook was outfitted with a higher-capacity six-cell battery, none of them lasted longer than four hours on our HD video rundown test. Both the ASUS and the Lenovo got less than three hours, which is incredibly low for a modern ultraportable or netbook. Nevertheless, the Mini 311 posted the best time at 3 hours and 51 minutes -- far short of the standard Atom-based HP Mini 5101's six hours, and not even close to the eight hours we got from the Pine Trail-equipped ASUS Eee PC 1005PE.
Overall Winner
ASUS Eee PC 1201N
We're sad to say that we're a little disappointed in this crop of Ion netbooks -- we've waited over a year for them to arrive, and, well, it's just not last year anymore. While the $499 Eee PC 1201N is our choice of the group since it doesn't sacrifice performance for added graphics, it still feels dated in some ways: Intel's next generation Pine Trail Atom has just been released and you can get a comparable ULV laptop for just a few more bucks. You'll have to ask yourself if the improved graphics and multimedia capabilities of these machines are worth the decrease in performance and battery life the Ion chipset seems to involve -- and whether that tradeoff is worth an extra $200 over a typical netbook. In the end, we just feel like this is all too little, too late, and maybe NVIDIA knows it too -- Ion 2 is supposedly right around the corner. Let's just hope we don't have to wait another year.
The 1201N's N330 has no speedstep, so that hurts battery life.
@jayayess1190 Not that any of the Intel Chips would be speedstepping if they're playing Video.
I think the Ion uses more electricity doing HD than the Atom, but then again, the Atom doesn't exactly do HD smoothly.
@jincongz
But butttt, CULV can't play WoW at 30 fps. LOL.
Yea. The acer 11.6" CULV Timemachine is only $399 with 8 hrs battery life.
@jincongz These would speedstep if they could... I have an Ion mobo in my media PC at home and the CPU usage is no more than 30% playing full screen 1080p - you'd be surprised by the effect Ion has.
It seems to me like a $500+ netbook is missing the point, especially when there are nice ULV laptops in that price range that offer the same or better battery life and better overall performance. And with 11.6+ inch screens, these things aren't as portable as they used to be.
@Aleman you're right. over $400 and you might as well go for a full sized laptop. i have a 10.1" EeePC and my brother has an 11.6" Gateway. i have to say 11.6" is the perfect size and anything more doesn't really make sense. at that point all you really have is and underpowered ultra-portable.
@Aleman
Couldn't agree more.
I just bought a $249 10" Eee last week at my local Best Buy and I couldn't be happier. Sure, it doesn't have 8 hours of battery life, it's impossible to play fullscreen 1080p flash video (though fullscreen "HQ" Youtube works just fine), and I'm stuck with XP, but I'm sure as shit not willing to double or triple the price I paid just for those luxuries. There's only so much you can do with a 10" screen, anyway.
Netbooks are awesome because they're incredibly portable. I really can't fathom a better way to waste money than by buying a $649 12" netbook.
Granted, this argument completely changes if you're talking about this being somebody's ONLY machine.
to an average joe consumer this would be a steal, I mean its small, has a processor named Atom, and graphics chip called Ion...that sounds SO COOL(and trendy)! and if that average joe consumer learned anything in his 10th grade chemistry class he knows atoms and ions some how go together so it must be worth the buy.
@Aleman Completely agree. At this price point these aren't netbooks at all. And sorry, but the performance of my Dell Mini 9 running an N270 was BARELY acceptable. But hey, I paid under $300 for it. Buying something for $600 that runs slower than that? I don't think so.
I just bought an Acer Aspire AS1810tz for under $500. You can get the AS1410 for even less. It is smaller and lighter than ALL of these. It has better battery life. Better specs (802.11n, HDMI, eSATA, etc). A better version of Windows (7 Home Premium). And of course it performs better on almost any benchmark except gaming.
Netbooks aren't about gaming, which these Ion-based systems apparently aren't that good at anyway, they're about "good-enough" computing. Most of the time they're just secondary systems used for internet web browsing. Why would you pay these prices for something like that?
@Fanfoot
"Good enough" usually includes YouTube.
@Aleman
Netbooks are supposed to be incredibly small and they should cost little more than $200. If you are going to spend more money, get a CULV.
I am really hoping to see some good stuff come out in the next month with Intels new Arrandale CULVs. Graphics performance will supposedly double the current ones, and they will have HyperThreading, Turbo Mode, more aggressive power management and just in general be more efficient.
An Acer Timeline with Arrandale may have 10 hour battery life, significantly improved HD playback(turbo mode), multitasking(hyperthreading), gaming(new GPU) and hopefully some cool features like USB 3, eSATA or whatever else. And if they can deliver this for $400-$600, who in their right mind would pay as much or more for some Ion netbook with a 1.66ghz Atom that can't even last for more than a few hours on a charge?
That's why broadcom has that crystal HD chips, it enables netbooks to play HD but won't raise the price like an ion does, I wonder how much atom netbooks with that thing cost though.
@Aleman
Is Aleman your last name? It's mine so I'm just curious.
Is this a commercial or a comparison? All I know is MONEY MONEY MONEY....
I'm pretty happy i just bought an acer aspire 1410 for 325 off of ebay, 11.6" and the intel 4500mhd isnt that bad. If i were you i would look at this notebook and the msi u210.
who would pay $500 for a NETbook???
I love my acer aspire, runs Windows 7. Great for browsing when I am having a Bowel Movement.
isnt this a little late? i mean, the new atoms are already out and ion2 is (hopefully) just a few weeks away. does it make much sense to buy an n280/ion1 netbook right now?
The battery life part of it makes me feel a little bit better about just recently buying my Toshiba NB205-N210.
The main point of my Netbook was taking it to class for 6-7 hours and not needing an AC adapter the entire time... if I wanted power or an HDMI port I would simply use my large laptop.
PRIZE FIGHT!
Is it just me or do these things look like Notebooks and not Netbooks to me? $650 dollars? 12 inch screen?
That is barely smaller than the 13 inch screen I had on my compaq laptop 6 years ago......and it is barely faster and cost $200 dollars more?
Have people totally forgotten what a NETBOOK was supposed to be? These are just smaller Laptops now with crippled power....I will stick with my 9 inch Mini9 that does all a Netbook needs to do
The winner's battery life is a joke. Really glad I am not getting in on this "netbook" hype ..
I hope there will be more ARM based Netbooks in the future (OMAP4 Please!) which should have amazing battery life and tons of performance as well.
Wow, really disappointing results. I'm glad I didn't wait for an ION netbook. I can now skip a generation and get a better product hopefuly when ION2 comes out.
@Yuusou
Ion 2 + Atom won't solve the fundamental problem that the CPU sucks and was never really meant to do much in the first place.
You're going to have to go for CULV + Ion to get any worthwhile performance, and at that point, you might as well get a real notebook since you'll already be in the $800-$1000 price range.
@Jeff Kibuule Well, all I'm hoping is for ION2 to have better interaction with the cpu to get rid of that lag in everyday performance and for battery life to be better. I'm not looking for a powerhouse here, form factor is definitely my main concern. I should have expressed my disappointment a little better. Gomen m(_ _)m
Wow, Engadget is now using pretty backgrounds for their product shots! No more studio white softbox, bring on the outdoor scenic pix!
I'm not interested in gaming at all, the only thing that would interest me in something like ION is promised 1080p support. But Broadcom's HD Accelerator seems to do the job swimmingly, couple that with a new 10", Pine-trail netbook and you have an ACTUAL netbook, with full HD video and a battery life that isn't less than my Core 2 Duo, 9600M energy raper of a MBP..... I mean 2 hours and 26 mins!? That's horrendous!
So it looks like these are overpriced for what they are. Can someone recommend a cheap CULV that I can use as my every day machine (web, MS Office, porn, etc.) that won't break the bank, but will outperform these chumps?
Would the Acer 1810T fit this bill?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Now that the 1201N has been crowned the winner it looks like the people on the site would love to see it compete against a similar sized ULV laptop like the 1410 from Acer. Brand new I think the Acer was selling for $429, it comes with the 4500MD video card which some have said will play HD YouTube videos.
That's the biggest difference between these netbooks and low end laptops. You won't be able to watch a clip on Hulu let alone a show on a dirt cheap laptop. These netbooks are optimzed for the thousands of people leaving their cable company and watching most of their video content online.
Newegg, Zipzoomfly keep selling out of their stock of the 1201N so obviously people want to pay. The only place which seems to have them actually in stock is B&H: http://www.netbookreports.com/2009/12/1201n-asus-netbook-in-stock-at-bh/ - and there's no telling how long that will last.
People want 12" computers which are video centric and have better battery life than "standard" notebooks. I'm not sure anyone would pay more than $500, but that's the sweet spot every manufacturer is going to be aiming toward.
@(Unverified)
I have an Acer 1410, and it's a fantastic ultraportable laptop with one problem: Intel GMA X4500MHD absolutely, positively sucks for gaming.
If you don't play 3D games at all (or only play titles made before around 2003) the CULV laptops are good options. The Acer 1410 happens to be small, light, and cheap, and it has very few major flaws.
The problem is, GMA X4500 is absolutely terrible in any kind of games. It's not just slow, it's incredibly unbelievably slow. You can't even run WoW at minimum settings acceptably well, even with old-world content that is essentially unchanged from 2005.
The benchmarks don't tell the whole story, though. The GMA has absolute crap texture filtering, so get ready for blurry-vision. It has a number of driver bugs that lead to graphical issues or extreme slowdown.
The stupid thing is that the GeForce 9400M chipset would be a decent match for the CULV. You're not going to run Crysis well on a GeForce 9400M (or a CULV Core 2 for that matter), but games like Portal or WoW would run absolutely fine with moderate settings.
Instead, we can only get the GeForce 9400M in netbooks (Ion) or much bigger laptops like the Dell Inspiron 14z; the only exception is the $1500 MacBook Air, which, with 2GB of memory and a $1500 starting price tag, isn't even remotely in the same category as CULV notebooks like the Acer 1410.
Give me an Acer 1410 with a Pentium Dual-Core 1.3GHz (or a Core 2 Duo 1.3GHz) and an Nvidia GeForce 9400M, and you could get $700 from me.
Unfortunately, that laptop doesn't exist. There is no sub-$800, sub-4lb, GeForce 9400M, Core 2 (or Pentium Dual Core) laptop, to my knowledge. The Asus UL80vt comes close (it's >4lbs, but not by much) but it apparently has build quality issues and a shit display.
Instead, I'm switching to a ThinkPad T400. It's huge compared to a CULV notebook, but for $800 you can get good battery life (switchable graphics), a fast Core 2 Duo CPU, 4GB of memory, a DVD burner, and decent graphics (Radeon HD 3470, about 1.5x as fast as GeForce 9400M).
If you care about GPU performance, the CULV notebooks simply aren't there. They're probably fine for the 90% of people who will never play a 3D PC game, but they aren't fine for me.
@brianwsnetworknet This was an awesome comment. That's all.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: 12"+ is not a netbook anymore.
so at the end of the day, however, the HP is the best value, and a beautiful piece of kit [this post is made from a HP Mini 1000].
too bad they're unreliable
Why is it always the same deal with NVIDIA? Ion/Tegra sound good when announced... then months pass by and by the time they are released they are outdated by Intel/Qualcomm, and another NVIDIA product (Ion2/Tegra2) is "just around the corner"...
Testing via Engadget app.
It's a shame that the manufacturers decided to go for the $499 market with 12 inch "netbooks". I don't really see the point.
Where ION really shines is in the HTPC market - You can build a 1080p capable silent box for under $400, and it'll fit in a ridiculously small enclosure.
One thing I don't get is how these netbooks played 1080p Flash, when Flash doesn't offer GPU acceleration support yet?
@JerkyChew
Adobe flash supports gpu acceleration on 10.1 beta
@Ermal Turkeshi
Ahh, I see where I was confused... It's out but the GPU acceleration only works in Windows. Since I do all my HTPC stuff in Linux and those are the mailing lists I follow, I guess I assumed too much by just skimming the posts. Thanks.
I want to see a Ion Netbook Tablet with capacitive touch screen and Wacom stylus.
@Synergi
Why??? It would cost a bundle.
@max1001
Ion should give me enough power to run touch apps like Surface globe. I want a easy time writing on the screen but the main reason is the size. I like the thin and light sizes of netbooks more then I like their crappy specs. I like the long battery life also.
If they make a laptop tablet with stronger specs, thin, light and good battery. I'd be all for that one too. :)
Put an Ion2 with a 510 Pinetrail and in a 13.3" body so it has a proper battery that lasts +8 hrs and i'll buy one in an instant. Till the its the UL30VT
Something is wrong with your specs on the HP 311 and the associated price. According to HP website the 320GB SATA HDD requires Windows 7. You have OS listed as XP. And why you need such a large HDD in a netbook is beyond me. Trying to match your configuration on the HP site is basically impossible. Also how does the HP 311 win the battery test when the Asus Eee PC has 8 hours?
@IseWise
That Asus that has 8 hours wasn't a tablet. Its a netbook I think they used for comparison on battery life against its tablet counter parts.
@IseWise
Yea I kinda realized that after I submitted my comment (no edit functionality in the comments...) However my complaint about the HDD and the OS is still valid.
http://imgur.com/gMUhV.png
@Synergi No, there were no tablets in the review/testing at all. They compared the newer Ion netbooks with older netbooks that have the N270/N280 Atom chips and no Ion. Look up the model numbers if you want the complete specs of those machines. As for the HP Mini 311 they used, it is a machine they already had on hand. HP may not sell that exact configuration anymore, but they did at one time or Engadget could have a special review unit. I am pretty sure the Mini 311 was released before Windows 7, so the original configuration only had to support Windows XP. Times have changed.
@CapnShiner
Doh! I knew that. I am stuck big time on tablets!
Thanks for setting me straight!
Yeah...it's pretty funny how the whole concept of AFFORDABLE netbooks has been lost somehow over the months. Once the price goes over $400 BEFORE TAXES, you might as well get a full sized laptop. If anyone can direct me to a good deal laptop for $299-$349, that would be great.
@Plazmic Flame
F***, need edit button Engadget, meant to say "good deal netbook"...
SMH
I just got a HP Mini 311. Engadget's overall assessment kinda misses the real point and all of their benchmarks boil down to nitpicks.
Netbooks are not full on laptops. A netbook's primary function, as its name implies, relates to the internet. The fact that these particular netbooks CAN do many of the things a regular portable can is an added bonus.
The fact that people bitch and moan when a $400 netbook can't do this stuff as well as a $2,000 laptop is just pure greed at play. People want more for less. Nevermind the fact that a netbook is not supposed to compete with a notebook.
I blame this on the manufacturers. Though equally motivate by greed, Intel & MS set forth recommended specs for netbooks for a reason. Netbooks are essentially supposed to be the 21st century version of the old PDA. Nothing more.
Unfortunately, caving in to consumer greed, netbook manufacturers keep on ignoring the specs. They're pushing these netbooks into laptop territory, drawing the inescapable comparisons and expectations of functionality.
Like I said, I just got the HP Mini311 w/3GB. Prior to getting it, I was totally ANTI-netbook. However, with it now in my hands, I'm actually impressed. It not only does what I expected it to do, but it also does more. I'm pleasantly surprised.
Look, when I want to do my whole CG thing and bust out 40mil polys I'll head to my $3,500 desktop workstation. That's where I'll install the latest and greatest PC games that the industry has to offer.
When I want to sit in bed & maybe surf the net in comfort, I'll whip out the netbook. This is the sort of system I'll drop on early 00s games like Deus Ex, Quake 3, or WoW. A netbook is a perfect sort of system for retro gaming. Drop on the SNES emulator and play Mario wherever you go.
However, I wouldn't expect a netbook to play Modern Warfare 2. That's just not what a netbook is designed to do. NOBODY, not even Engadget, should expect more from a netbook than they should.
Pay for $400 worth of PC and get $400 worth of PC. With these ION equipped netbooks, you get as much power for $400 as you would have for a $2,500 PC back in 2003. That sounds bad, but, iirc, we did quite a bit with PCs in 2003. Best of all, it's all portable.
Here's my rundown of the HP Mini 311:
PROS:
- Small & lightweight
- Fast for what it is designed to do
- Solid 5hr+ battery life, which is more than enough since you're not going to spend all day on a netbook.
- Solid 3D power for low poly CG work. Handles 250k pols in C4D quite well in real-time.
- 160GB is more than enough HDD space since XP has a small footprint
- A max of 3GB of RAM is more than enough since XP idles at ~150MB or so.
- Pretty good 1080p performance & MP4 playback
- Handles all of my favorite old school PC and emu console games very well.
- Far less pre-installed bloatware than my desktop PC
- 2 minutes to upgrade RAM. 2 minutes to permanently hack the ION LE to ION full.
CONS:
- Roxio's recovery utility is crap and doesn't work. I had to create custom bootable USB recovery stick from the included I386
- The view angle isn't meant for more than one person.
- The contrast ratio is a notch below my Cintiq 12wx tablet and far below my 22" SynchMaster.
- Weak speakers
- Super sensitive touchpad. Bundled ALPS drivers won't disable touchpad while typing or when a external mouse is connected. (Dell touchpad drivers fix this problem though.)
BOTTOM LINE:
This thing blows the doors off of the old Toshiba my college gave me when I started my freshman year in 1993. Apples to oranges, but I remember getting a whole lot done on that laptop. I also owned far more expensive desktops in the past that did far less than this netbook.
For what a netbook is designed to do, the HP Mini 311 is a dream. It doesn't matter to me if "x" app starts 2 seconds slower than "y" netbook. That's trivial. Does it get the INTENDED job done? Hell yeah. Does it do that job well. No doubt. Can it do more than just net-based apps. Yes and surprisingly well. Will it ever replace my desktop or laptop? Not. Then again, it's not supposed to.
Remember that. A netbook is NOT a laptop or desktop replacement. Anybody expecting $3,500 worth of PC for $400 is basically a cheap SOB. Shell out the dough for a desktop if you need desktop gaming/work power.