True to a certain extent, but in practice, this rule of thumb actually works.
ie. Don't bother getting any main desktop machine with a Passmark below 1000 because it's too slow even for basic usage.
OTOH, above 2000, it's generally OK.
In the 1000-2000 range your point may be more valid, but I'm recommending getting something over 2000, which is easy to do in 2015 for low cost.
Why is AMD still in business?
I just checked my mom's C10 AMD
It cannot play a 480P video on youtube it stutters and takes 5 seconds to open to fullscreen and start playing even though its badly.
I have therefore concluded its more on the lines of a Pentium 2 from around 1995
A chinese Mediatek is way faster than this garbage CPU. Those crappy BLU phones seem faster than this rubbish.
Why is AMD still in business?
Google for me is better than Firefox and its variants at this assuming the problem is the same. You can fix it, though.It cannot play a 480P video on youtube it stutters and takes 5 seconds to open to fullscreen and start playing even though its badly.
Question would anyone be complaining if AMD sold this cpu to a chinesse shell company (similarly to Sony with ps4) and they required the shell company to not use any terminology connecting the chip to AMD. Aka a rebrand?
I ask for most people are tolerant of mediatek cortex a7 and this is a similar cpu.
What is C-10? Is it a very low end Bobcat?
If so, I thought they all have integrated H.264 decoding. Or am I mistaken? Or perhaps your browser is trying to play it through software decoding? I ask because even my Atom 330 machine with ION will play back Blu-ray 1080p smoothly.
http://youtu.be/VmgxSxb6prM
As for the Mediatek, it is a mobile SoC utilizing a mobile OS to play back H.264 with a hardware decoder.
BTW, I'm typing this on an iPad 2 with dual-core 1 GHz ARM A8, purchased in 2011.
I finally gave the APU's a shot with an AMD A6-6400 (or something of the sort). I twas $350 during a Black Friday deal and I needed a laptop to take care of certain stuff while on vacation.
All I'm going to say is I'm glad Wal-mart doesn't have a restocking fee.
Opening up Google Maps was a chore. While on vacation needing to find directions was important, and unfortunately we had terrible reception. My phone loaded Google Maps on WiFi better than that Laptop did on WiFi.
Most likely all the HP Bloatware, but that laptop was the slowest thing I've used in a long time. Even my work PC (E8400's 1GB of RAM, 5400 RPM HDD) felt snappier.
I finally gave the APU's a shot with an AMD A6-6400 (or something of the sort). I twas $350 during a Black Friday deal and I needed a laptop to take care of certain stuff while on vacation.
All I'm going to say is I'm glad Wal-mart doesn't have a restocking fee.
Opening up Google Maps was a chore. While on vacation needing to find directions was important, and unfortunately we had terrible reception. My phone loaded Google Maps on WiFi better than that Laptop did on WiFi.
Most likely all the HP Bloatware, but that laptop was the slowest thing I've used in a long time. Even my work PC (E8400's 1GB of RAM, 5400 RPM HDD) felt snappier.
This has been my experience testing them too. Too many people are hung up on "but it's a quad core!" and not really grasping that day to day web-browsing, etc, will still often "spike up" only 1 core to the max for a short period during page rendering. You could stick an 8-core Avoton / Jaguar in there and it'll still often feel slower in actual practice than a "big core" 35w Pentium.The only way those atom and Kabini processers make decent scores in benchmarks is that they are quad cores, which does not help that much in normal day to day use.
Well, Intel did develop P III Tualatin further because they realized the P4 was teh suck.
Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P6_(microarchitecture)#P6_Variant_Enhanced_Pentium_M
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_M
So Pentium M, Core and Core 2 all happened due to the last hurrah of the P III.
They also need a new flagship desktop CPU pronto. It just needs a small IGP and 4 modules and boom, there we go.
I do wonder why they haven't released 3/4-module APUs on FM2+ yet. Is it just the cost for layout / design / masks is too much, compared to how many that the would sell?
Or are they afraid to finally put the nail in the coffin of AM3+? Are they still actually mfg'ing AM3+ FX-series CPUs? Or just selling off stockpiled inventory from before?
Even a nice little six-"core" / 3-module FM2+ CPU would be an advancement, I think.
I do wonder why they haven't released 3/4-module APUs on FM2+ yet. Is it just the cost for layout / design / masks is too much, compared to how many that the would sell?
Or are they afraid to finally put the nail in the coffin of AM3+? Are they still actually mfg'ing AM3+ FX-series CPUs? Or just selling off stockpiled inventory from before?
Even a nice little six-"core" / 3-module FM2+ CPU would be an advancement, I think.
Would the fact that it was on FM2+ sell any more chips than the AM3+ model? I sincerely doubt the increase in sales would make up for the cost of a new die.
This has been my experience testing them too. Too many people are hung up on "but it's a quad core!" and not really grasping that day to day web-browsing, etc, will still often "spike up" only 1 core to the max for a short period during page rendering. You could stick an 8-core Avoton / Jaguar in there and it'll still often feel slower in actual practice than a "big core" 35w Pentium.
AMD bet too much money on big graphics APUs. The cost of such a large die, of which a large part only serves gamers and a few media enthusiasts, just got transferred to ordinary consumers who didn't care or didn't know. Alternatively the CUs from a practical standpoint have failed to really augment the CPU in the way we were hoping. Non graphics GPGPU in games hasn't taken off at all and most SIMD heavy programs still use CPU cores purely. I would partially blame AMD for not getting more devs on board with GPGPU.