very low power machine

ninja2000 said:
entireweb - I have been considering buying an Atom but my one reservation is that S3 doesnt work! Have you tried S3?

Thanks in advance
Click to expand...

Dont fully understand what you mean by S3? If its the via graphics chipset then the atom board comes with integrated intel on board graphics: Intel GMA 950

Here is the whole spec for atom mobo INTEL D945GCLF

Processor
Intel Atom 230 @ 1x 1.60GHz (Diamondville 45nm)

Chipset
Intel 82945G (ICH7)

L2 Cache
512kb

System Memory
1x DDR2 533/667 RAM (max 2GB)

Graphics
Intel GMA 950

Power
20 Pin ATX, P4-connector

Connectors (rear) 2x PS/2
1x Parallel
1x D-SUB15 (VGA)
1x RS232
1x LAN 10/100MBit (Realtek)
3x Sound (Line Out, Line In, Microphone)

Audio
Realtek High Definition Audio (ALC)

Connectors (internal) PCI (with support for 1>2 PCI riser)
AUDIO
2 x USB
2 x SATA (3GBs)
1 x IDE

Included
D945GCLF Main board (with 1.6Ghz Atom CPU)
I/O ATX rear plate
SATA cable
IDE cable
Quick start Guide
Drivers CD

Form Factor
Mini-ITX (17x17cm)
 
wow I havent followed the atom very much I'm really tempted to try and get one. my home linux server burns up to much electric for my liking. £45 thats a steal.
 
Methanoid said:
Samsung... most use 6W in the pages I've seen.... tell me tho about your G4 Mac... whats the speed like unRARing say a 4.5gb DVD? I'm wondering about a Mac mini for download box. The LS is great but it takes AGES and I mean IceAges to unpack a 10gb download!!
Click to expand...

I mainly copy the files off the mac mini and do the un raring etc on either my HTPC or office PC. But unraring a 700 mb takes a couple of minutes. So I guess a 4,7 gb would take 15-20 minutes.

But the Mac mini (Mac OS) has a serious flaw, which is why I have moved to the Atom, and that it can only read NTFS drives and not write. It can write to fat 32. But fat 32 doesnt support files sizes over 4GB. Which rules out 720p /1080p mkvs. I had a 500gb usb drive plugged into the mac mini and couldnt copy mkvs to it without doing file splitting, which was a pain.
 
NicNac said:
wow I havent followed the atom very much I'm really tempted to try and get one. my home linux server burns up to much electric for my liking. £45 thats a steal.
Click to expand...

Its not quiet as cheap as that, unless you happen to have a mini itx case and PSU laying around. I paid another 80 euros for those.
 
I have an old video or something I can use or maybe even make something myself, its going to be hidden away anyway. Im very tempted now come payday I might splash the cash are these atom boards easy to get hold of?
 
entireweb said:
I mainly copy the files off the mac mini and do the un raring etc on either my HTPC or office PC. But unraring a 700 mb takes a couple of minutes. So I guess a 4,7 gb would take 15-20 minutes.

But the Mac mini (Mac OS) has a serious flaw, which is why I have moved to the Atom, and that it can only read NTFS drives and not write. It can write to fat 32. But fat 32 doesnt support files sizes over 4GB. Which rules out 720p /1080p mkvs. I had a 500gb usb drive plugged into the mac mini and couldnt copy mkvs to it without doing file splitting, which was a pain.
Click to expand...

OSX has NTFS support in about 3-4 ways I found... Fuse is one.. another is called Paragon NTFS for OSX I think... I looked into it myself.

Right now my Linkstation does everything (unRAR too) but on big files it can take some hours!! But its a 24/7 machine and what do I care if its unRARing for 2 hours at 3am!!

I may try an Atom machine when Asus Ebox is released.. it looks nice and tidy!
 
Why do you need to use NTFS on mac mini anyway? Just use ext2 and if you need to read those drives under windows for some reason there is Ext2 IFS For Windows...
 
I spent about £150 on mini-itx 800mhz mobo case and ram a couple of years back. would be very interested to see the 1.4hgz one for that cheep. For the op, that is the way to go. I have the mini case and a laptop 80gb hd, uses about 20w when in use, and is on 24/7, got winxp and vnc / torrent / ftp running fine on it
 
Problem with the Atom is that the 945 chipset motherboards used have a TDP that’s ten times higher than the processor’s, at idle an machine using an Atom on a 945 chipset motherboard is going to use 10W more than a C7 Via platform machine of otherwise identical spec. So for now don't buy atom for power savings alone.
 
Biffa said:
Problem with the Atom is that the 945 chipset motherboards used have a TDP that’s ten times higher than the processor’s, at idle an machine using an Atom on a 945 chipset motherboard is going to use 10W more than a C7 Via platform machine of otherwise identical spec. So for now don't buy atom for power savings alone.
Click to expand...

False

The TDP of the single core atom and 945 chipset is 12W. Now your not telling me that the C7 Via is 2W!!!

But its not really the point the current Atom based board is a first step OEM product, designed for running XP to surf the web, send mails, watch dvd etc. It isnt designed to be a ultra low watt server board. But it just so happens it is low wattage and low in price as well.
 
entireweb - sorry, I should have made my post clearer! I read a preview and they stated they couldnt get S3 sleep to work, this is a high priority for me as I have my file server in S3 sleep quite a lot with wake on LAN enabled.
 
v0n said:
Why do you need to use NTFS on mac mini anyway? Just use ext2 and if you need to read those drives under windows for some reason there is Ext2 IFS For Windows...
Click to expand...

Yes but I dont want to jump through hoops just to copy files from one pc to another. IMO mac OS is a bag of **** regarding file sharing. I tried to get Samba sharing working from my mac to windows Xp and after extensive command line script modding of the smb.cnf it just wouldnt perform as well as XP->XP file sharing or linux->xp file sharing. So I gave up. IMO just rubbish!
 
Biffa said:
Problem with the Atom is that the 945 chipset motherboards used have a TDP that’s ten times higher than the processor’s, at idle an machine using an Atom on a 945 chipset motherboard is going to use 10W more than a C7 Via platform machine of otherwise identical spec. So for now don't buy atom for power savings alone.
Click to expand...

i would also like to occasionally watch standard def videos so im thinking the atom would be better than than a lower power machine. i'm thinking ill wait till the eeebox is out and compare the price/wattage/performance between that and a build your own atom box
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom