thats kinda... low :S for those prices you will always go with intel, from gma 950 to 4500mhd
On Aug 4, 4:24 pm, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote: > around 320$ perhaps? ^^ RM 1000 in my currency though.. > > > > On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 11:12 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote: > > How cheap you want to go? > > > On Aug 4, 3:01 pm, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote: > > > learned something new every day in this group, lol, u guys really are > > > pros..thanks ^^...CPUs was never my expertise here, guess i should avoid > > > buying netbooks anytime soon...i still searching for a nice mobile system > > to > > > replace my current laptop which the battery last only 10 minutes (after > > > being revive via freezer).. > > > > so, which is the cheapest that u guys can recommend me for acceptable CPU > > > performance? > > > > On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 8:04 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Seriously, bin atoms, bit celerons and bin neos. The lowest acceptable > > > > performing cpu is the "almost" core 2 duo, known as pentium dual core, > > > > which is something between a core duo and a core 2 duo. The good thing > > > > about it is that it's usually paired with at least an intel gm45/pm45 > > > > chipset. Single cores? I would only buy high clocked dual core, or a > > > > medium clocked quad core at least. There are good cpus at good prices, > > > > and as Jeremy showed, a 50$ discount usually isn't worth the > > > > processing power you lose. Being cheap with the cpu is never a good > > > > idea. > > > > > On Aug 4, 12:49 pm, "THEfog ." <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > @jeremy > > > > > > Makes you wonder why huh? Intel were planning the same thing > > apparently > > > > for > > > > > their Atoms, they were originally to use the ancient Presscott > > > > Architecture > > > > > but that idea was binned. They must figure that somehow these older > > > > > processors are better for a Battery life > Performance machine, they > > > > mustn't > > > > > take into account that the time people spend waiting for this slower > > > > CPU's > > > > > roughly translates into the gain of battery life they squeeze out of > > a > > > > > ancient architecture. I'm pretty sure that they would be better off > > using > > > > a > > > > > more modern architecture at a lower voltage. > > > > > > THEfog > > > > > > On 04/08/2010 9:27 PM, "Espionage724" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Never knew that much info about CPU's even existed... lol Thx ppls :) > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:12 AM, Jeremy Shaw <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I agree with you on al... > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Acer TravelMate 2480 > > > > > GFX: GMA950 CPU: Intel Celeron M 420 @ 1.6Ghz RAM: 2GB DDR2 > > 333Mhz > > > > > HDD: S... > > > > > -- > > > > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > > > > -- > > > Laptop: > > > Acer Aspire > > > Core Duo T2300E @ 1.67GHz > > > Intel GMA 950 IGP > > > Intel 945 Chipset > > > 1GB RAM (512MB*2) Dual Channel DDR2 > > > 80GB standard PATA HDD > > > Win7 Ultimate 32bit / Ubuntu 10.04 > > > -- > > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > > -- > Laptop: > Acer Aspire > Core Duo T2300E @ 1.67GHz > Intel GMA 950 IGP > Intel 945 Chipset > 1GB RAM (512MB*2) Dual Channel DDR2 > 80GB standard PATA HDD > Win7 Ultimate 32bit / Ubuntu 10.04 -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
