New netbook is slow. Want it to go faster

"Please leave a message at the beep, we will get back to you when your support contract expires."

Moderators: phlip, Moderators General, Prelates

moiraemachy
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:47 pm UTC

New netbook is slow. Want it to go faster

Postby moiraemachy » Sun Jul 06, 2014 1:05 pm UTC

So, I recently bought a new computer, a 10" convertible with a Bay Trail atom(4 cores, 1.33GHz, runs 64 bit instructions, 2MB cache, goes TURBO BOOST) to replace my 2009 notebook which had high end low voltage core2duo (2 cores, 1.33GHz, runs 64bit, 3MB cache). Here is my problem: I expected the new device to perform on par with my old laptop (which I consider "fast enough"), but it is significantly slower when browsing the web. As in, it sometimes hiccups when loading feeds and scrolling down (facebook is the worst offender). This didn't happen on the old device. In fact, sometimes the cursor freezes for a while when composing text and going through words with ctrl+arrow keys. This is extra weird when considering that regular W8 slidey wobbly zoomy action feels pretty snappy.

Here is another big offender: browsing through this page http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php.

It is entirely possible that this is exactly what I should be getting and there is nothing wrong with my new pc, but I want to know: shouldn't they perform about on par? What is the bottleneck here? Maybe there is some features I can turn off that will make it better (this is also my first W8 machine)? Here is a breakdown of the differences I considered:

CPU: atom Z3745 VS core2duo SU7300. The atom scores slightly higher on benchmarks, but the old processor only has 2 cores, so I am assuming single thread performance is significantly better on the old CPU.
Screen: both have the same resolution, but the new pc has a touchscreen. Also, the old laptop had a weird overclock option, never used it (it required reboot).
Graphics: old pc had a switchable graphics card (NVIDIA® GeForce® G 210M ), but never used it except when gaming, so it should be disregarded I guess? This was from before GPU and IGPU could work together, changing to discrete graphics made the screen go black and required you to close most open windows. I assumed the new system's integrated video would be superior.
RAM: 2GB on the new system, 4GB on the old. I am browsing the web with one window, this shouldn't be the bottleneck I guess?
HD: 32GB SSD x 320GB HD. Is this even relevant? New system is the clear winner in my books. The SSD still has plenty of space.
OS: W7 64-bit VS W8 32-bit. Want to install W8 64bit, but not sure it will make a difference.

My current bet is that the culprit is single threaded performance, but this just sounds dumb: if the SU7300 feels so superior, why wouldn't intel just make core2duos again with smaller transistors and booya, the new atom kicks ass?

EDIT: ehh, removed some windows apps (sports and news and food). When I rebooted, got this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/arnn07i1jbujv ... .09.53.jpg . Now it is working again, but the apps came back O.o. Deleted them and they vanished, but this was suspicious.
Last edited by moiraemachy on Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:46 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: New netbook is slow. Want it to go faster

Postby KnightExemplar » Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:26 pm UTC

moiraemachy wrote:Here is another big offender: browsing through this page http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php.


I'm writing my response in my Dell Venue 8 tablet. Split Screen, with the passmark page open. What web browser are you using? IE11 is silky smooth for me.

It is entirely possible that this is exactly what I should be getting and there is nothing wrong with my new pc, but I want to know: shouldn't they perform about on par?


Most of the benchmarks I've seen are relatively on par. But... the Core2 Duo is a different architecture. What is fast on the C2D may be slow on Bay Trail. Nonetheless, I've just tried that webpage... what web browser are you using? It seems like IE11 takes advantage of those extra cores.

Graphics: old pc had a switchable graphics card (NVIDIA® GeForce® G 210M ), but never used it except when gaming, so it should be disregarded I guess? This was from before GPU and IGPU could work together, changing to discrete graphics made the screen go black and required you to close most open windows. I assumed the new system's integrated video would be superior.


Since Windows Vista, the GPU has been involved in most typical tasks. Web Browsing, window rendering, etc. etc. The GPU shouldn't be ignored... but the GeForce 210M is pretty crappy. I'd expect it to be better than the Bay Trail iGPU (which is among the worst). Overall though, I didn't have issues when I tested the webpage on my tablet...

My current bet is that the culprit is single threaded performance, but this just sounds dumb: if the SU7300 feels so superior, why wouldn't intel just make core2duos again with smaller transistors and booya, the new atom kicks ass?

Bay Trail is a $50 processor. Haswell is the true successor to C2D.

Haswell is much faster and much more power-efficient than Core2 Duo, while costing the same. Bay Trail however, was designed for the low-end. Its a super-cheap processor in laptops / tablets that cost only $400. (Your Core2Duo laptop probably cost nearly $800 or more when it came out). Price, Performance, Battery life. Pick two, because you can't have all three.

Bay Trail picks Price and Battery Life. Its cheap to make and has a ton of battery life. Performance is the weak stat of Bay Trail. But... because Bay Trail uses so little power, it is seen in small tablet designs (like the Toshiba Encore, Dell Venue 8, etc. etc.). Less power == smaller battery == lighter machine to carry around. Its performance is only slightly better than an iPad... so that it can have a similar battery life / weight characteristic.

If you're doing anything actually CPU intensive, its better to go with a higher-power CPU: Haswell-Y is the "ultra-low" design similar to the old CULV Core2Duo designs. Haswell-Y (lowest power), Haswell-U, Haswell-M, and Haswell Desktop (highest performance). But Haswell picks "Performance and Battery Life" as the two stats to focus on. I doubt that you'd find a good Haswell design cheaper than $650... with many Haswell designs reaching into the $1500+ mark... and above.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

moiraemachy
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:47 pm UTC

Re: New netbook is slow. Want it to go faster

Postby moiraemachy » Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:52 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:I'm writing my response in my Dell Venue 8 tablet. Split Screen, with the passmark page open. What web browser are you using? IE11 is silky smooth for me.
IE11 here. I tried chrome and no improvements.

KnightExemplar wrote:Bay Trail is a $50 processor. Haswell is the true successor to C2D.
Yeah, my thinking went "2009 to 2014, that's 3 level ups from moore's law. Put two stats points in power consumption (10W to 2.5W) and one in price". I realize this might not be a very accurate model :D.

edit in response to edits:
Your Core2Duo laptop probably cost nearly $800 or more when it came out)
Right on.

Also, I edited the OP and I will test the SSD. Things got suspicious.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: New netbook is slow. Want it to go faster

Postby KnightExemplar » Sun Jul 06, 2014 4:02 pm UTC

I don't have a keyboard, I think thats the difference between you and me. I redid the test on that webpage with the "Performance Monitor" up, and IE11 did go into a "not responding" loop very briefly (maybe about... 1 to 2 seconds) while the passmark page refreshed.

It could be that I'm just a bit slower on my tablet, so I don't notice those kinds of slowdowns. But yeah, IE11 definitely goes "not responding" for a short bit, although I don't really notice it if it weren't for performance monitor.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

moiraemachy
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:47 pm UTC

Re: New netbook is slow. Want it to go faster

Postby moiraemachy » Sun Jul 06, 2014 4:25 pm UTC

Yeah, 1-2 seconds of not responding is about what I get. Good to know at least it's expected.

Also, downloaded SpeedFan and I am getting a flame symbol, which I assume means that the CPU is throttling down means it reached an arbitrary SpeedFan limit(stress testing!). Also, found another atom CPU killer: scrolling up on facebook chat to see old messages (in the messages page).


Return to “The Help Desk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests