Intel Atom N550 Notebooks

by Balraj Sandhu on 8/30/2010 6:53 PM EST
Comments Locked

23 Comments

Back to Article

  • killayoself - Monday, August 30, 2010 - link

    .....to not buy one of these.
  • THX - Monday, August 30, 2010 - link

    I guueeesss more than 2gb of ram isn't needed on a netbook that's meant for casual use, but if it at least allowed for up to 4gb that would make it a better buy for tab-hungry users.
  • ProDigit - Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - link

    4GB would mean considerably higher power use, for only upto 33% better performance in games (dual channel DDR3).

    Problem here probably is that the Atom processor is only clocked at 1,6Ghz, and the memory is clocked just below half that.
    Having 2 sticks clocked at 667Mhz could probably cause a bottle neck on the memory controller or CPU, and larger cache would need to be implemented..
  • taltamir - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link

    who cares about netbook gaming? this is supposed to be a business device, but its too weak to be useful.
    2GB is too little ram, and cripples your ability to multitask, I tried a pinetrail netbook and it was constantly running out of ram and slowing down... it was also constantly running out of CPU power as well..

    the whole atom line can be best described as a turd... get a CULV i3

    BTW, the whole "64bit is for more than 4GB of ram" is bullshit. x86_64 has a theoretical processing speed improvement of up to 5x, it has been benchmarked as doing 3 and 4x faster on hash calculations, 60+% faster on some video encoding, and I have personally benchmarked it doing 23% faster on 7z file compression.
  • MonkeyPaw - Monday, August 30, 2010 - link

    So if I'm reading this right, there's still no speedstep on dual core models, even though they are netbook grade? Why can't intel give us simple speedstep?
  • KineticHummus - Monday, August 30, 2010 - link

    theres no speedstep on the DESKTOP versions of atom. these new netbook parts have it
  • ProDigit - Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - link

    Wow! my below post was posted in the wrong thread!
    Java error???

    I think what MonkeyPaw meant is turbo boost.
  • Gigantopithecus - Monday, August 30, 2010 - link

    I've owned a Samsung NC10 since shortly after the model's release almost two years ago. The primary performance issue with my netbook as I see it isn't the cpu - it's the chipset. The 945GSE has terrible integrated graphics and 2gb max DDR2 support. I often start hitting that 2gb limit during 'typical netbook usage,' though I rarely get the cpu sustained over 50% utilization. I'll reserve final judgment until I get my hands on a new generation Atom netbook, but from this article, it seems that neither of these issues (shit IGP, low max ram support) are resolved by the upcoming gen Atom netbooks. 2gb DDR3 max support is bewildering in late 2010/early 2011, especially for any system running any flavor of Win 7.

    I assume Bobcat's IGP will be better than the IGP on this new Atom platform. If it supports 4gb DDR3 and still delivers 'all-day computing,' then I see no reason to go with an Intel-based netbook come 2011.
  • ProDigit - Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - link

    forget about 4GB on atom. And bobcat's igp is totally different!
    I would also have preferred Intel to start with the Atom, and slowly work their way to the more difficult high end CPU's.
  • IntelUser2000 - Monday, August 30, 2010 - link

    Medfield is a smartphone and Tablet chip. To suggest in a Netbook is kinda ridiculous.

    The Netbook 32nm is called Cedar Trail.
  • JarredWalton - Monday, August 30, 2010 - link

    Sorry... my bad on that one. Updated text to reflect the correct name for the CPU as opposed to the "smartphone-esque" platform.
  • IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - link

    Thanks Jarred.

    One thing about the Atom not being on 32nm. The Core i3/i5/i7 32nm chips are really on bleeding edge tech. On a more risky change like with a new architecture, or a more flexible chip like with the Atom, they simply don't bring the latest process technologies as fast as possible.

    They even have some SoC variants using the special 45nm process with extra low leakage, and that required longer development time.

    Intel really only has timeframe advantage with their common products like laptop/desktop. All other segment the only advantage is really "peace of mind" that they'll execute.

    It would be cool to have all the Xeons, the Core ix's, the Atoms and even the chipsets to move to 32nm simultaneously, but business and execution realities simply don't allow that to happen.
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - link

    Well, that and they still have all those 45nm fabs that they can put to use making less complex chips like Atom. I mean, even at 45nm the new N550 is still only 87mm^2. It would be about half that on 32nm, which is likely why that's when HD Graphics capability will come on board. GMA 3150 still blows chunks, though, any way you slice it! ;-)
  • ET - Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - link

    I skipped the netbook craze because I own a Fujitsu P1510D, and while its 512MB makes it a pain to use, I didn't want to "move up" to a notebook with a slightly slower CPU, same size display, no tablet mode and slightly more weight. A dual core Atom with an Ion for $400 doesn't sound bad, but with Bobcat around the corner, I don't want to rush into buying something I'll later regret.
  • Roland00 - Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - link

    Intel like all Fabs has limited capacity. I rather them use 32nm for their core dual cores, their xeons, the upcoming sandybridge dual and quad cores.

    The atom in no way needs 45nm, there is an opportunity cost for every chip intel builds on 32nm and the atom by no way meets the value of putting it on 32nm instead of another more complicated chip on 45nm.

    Furthermore Intel is also outsourcing the atom on 45nm to TSMC, so it can have expanded capacity of the atom and hopefully get the atom in more "non computers" such as phone, gps, setup boxes, nas, etc.
  • ProDigit - Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - link

    We don't want a small increase of performance,
    It seems the N550 does not have the capacity to throttle both cores individually at a different speed setting, the graphics core is the same as the one before (why o why did they not integrate it with the CPU like on the newer Core i processors?
    And why did they not switch to 32nm too?
    And why did they not implement turbo boost on this?
    (granted, some users would run games on them with turbo boost enabled all the time).

    And why does the graphics processor not auto overclock?
    All new technologies that could lead to improved performance, and decrease of power consumption.
    But I guess we'll have to wait for another 3 years before Intel can make it right!

    It's funny but everytime they finally bring the product in public, they already are considered 'old', because they just did not keep track of the online community already being ahead of them!
    If I where intel, I would not even release this product until above requirements are met!
    That's the kind of processor the community is waiting for!
    Not a slightly modified D550 (or something) with slightly better power consumption!

    No wonder their processorline is cheered with many boos all over the world!
    Intel should surprise us, not discourage us by delivering an old product that not necessarily is faster than the previous one!
  • IntelUser2000 - Wednesday, September 1, 2010 - link

    @ProDigit

    Err, Pineview already integrates the GPU on the same die as the CPU, didn't you hear?
  • Kamen75 - Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - link

    It boggles my mind that as Intel releases new Atom processors they keep getting slower at single threaded applications. nearly all programs get more "bang for the buck" from a single core, you don't come close to doubling performance by adding a second core. Very many programs are still single threaded and can't utilize multiple cores. These are the kinds of light weight pieces of software that you want to use on netbooks. The N550 is slower than the N450 and the N450 is slower than the N280. Intel doesn't care about giving consumers more usable power because until AMD releases its' Ontario platform based on Bobcat architecture they will have no competition. All upcoming AMD IGP's based on Bobcat and Bulldozer architectures are to have DX 11 graphics so that means at least HD5xxx level graphics.
  • IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - link

    I think some of you are confused. The Intel-TSMC deal fizzled remember? I'm sure they might have one in future Atom products, but at the moment TSMC only exists on the MP20 southbridge for Moorestown. None of the CPUs use it.
  • LoneWolf15 - Wednesday, September 1, 2010 - link

    What disappoints me isn't the second core --but that Intel:

    a) Didn't update their graphics platform, but added insult to injury by
    b) Using the Pine Trail platform as an opportunity to limit others from improving on the graphics as well, by intentionally crippling nVidia's (and other third-party vendors) ability to offer solutions to link their graphics other than through a slow PCIe x1 bus.

    Intel's doing a great job of looking out for themselves on this one. For their customers? Not so much.
  • Jello1o - Thursday, September 2, 2010 - link

    The reason why all these Atom "updates" have been jokes is simple, Intel wants you to buy the real CPUs more. I believe they still are making a lot more profit on the i3/i5 notebook CPUs than Atom. That's why while those lines are getting cool updates Atom CPU architecture has remained mostly the same over the last two (?) years. No aggressive turbo boost, 5 (?) year-old gpu, stagnant pipeline.....

    With Gigantopithecus post about not going over 50% utilization, I too, see my Netbook (N270) not go over 50%. It's the Hyper Threading and how windows monitors cpu usage that tricks you like that. Our Atoms are certainly maxing out but since the operation they are performing doesn't lend itself to the hyper threading they support the usage registers as 50%. Turn off they hyper threading and you'll see it peak at 100% while still giving nearly the same performance at that specific task that was hitting 50%. I think: the design of Atoms is less capable than its' desktop brethren leading to much less usefulness in hyper threading. It still does provide some performance boost, just not as much as the Desktop CPUs.
  • xlink_nz - Thursday, December 2, 2010 - link

    I have a N550 and despite being dual core it is slower converting XviD to MPEG than my venerable Pentium 4 2.4 Ghz, should this be the case ?
  • Steven284 - Thursday, May 12, 2011 - link

    Can the Intel Atom N550 be exchanged for the Intel Atom D525 to see what difference ithe Intel D525 makes? Where would I get 1 of Intel Atom D525 from ?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now