New Commodore 10" netbook looks like a C64 laptop!

[the_leander]

downix wrote:

redrumloa wrote:

pyrre wrote:
The C= notebook uses the Via C7 cpu... some friends of mine means it is crap...
Any of you guys have any experience with that cpu?

Not in the last ~12 years. Via bought out Cyrix iirc, Cyrix back in the day were always terribly underwhelming. Pathetic to be more precise. I doubt things have changed much.

Yup, so pathetic that Intel had to license the VIA FPU to include in their high-end CPU's due to performance issues on Intel's CPU's.... but they don't like to mention that little factoid.

From what I understand the C7 is very similar performance wise to the Atom, both use in order execution, low power and similar speeds.

I think the big downside perhaps might be the VIA Chrome based graphics chip, but really, in this sort of platform, I can't see that being much of an issue - you're not going to be playing Quake 4 or HD content on any netbook.

That said, I do prefer VIA's vinyl sound chips over Intels stuff.

Yes, I'd consider buying one if I had the cash to spare, but I don't. I guess I'll have to stick with my first gen Eeepc 2G surf  :lol:

[the_leander]

downix wrote:

While yes, it is performance wise similar to the Atom, consider that the Atom is a brand new CPU, while the C7 is having a replacement coming out soon.  But you are right that the Chrome is the weak spot, but made up for with Vinyl IMHO.  For a netbook, I'd sooner have better sound than video.

The thing is that the Chromes being a weak spot in terms of a desktop is pretty much irrelevant when it comes to a netbook with a screen resolution of around 1024x600. It's also why I made the point about hd content, not to say it couldn't do it, but rather that it'd be somewhat pointless given the screensize.

downix wrote:
Incidentally, the VIA solution can handle HD video.  I've done it.

Nice  :-)

downix wrote:
if the price is not so bad as I'm seeing ($600+, ouch!) I might consider this over the Dell or Sylvania netbooks I've been eyeing.

At that sort of price point you're into MSI wind and EeePC 1001 territory, but given that both are 10 inch screens verses the 901's 9 inch screen, there is a somewhat understandable jump in cost.

That being said, at that end of the market it had better have every bell and whistle going, not to mention 7+ hours of battery life (as the Eee 1001 does) if it hopes to compete.