equazcion wrote:Since Grandma probably doesn't care about high-end gaming, she's better off with this. I have no problem recommending budget computers for people who need those, as long they're getting what they think they're getting.

This thing should have been built to look like the micro book-PC it actually is, rather than passed off as something else -- and despite the seemingly low price, it should be even cheaper -- or contain more actual PC parts, as the alternative above does.

Let's pretend HP ends up with a surplus of either large cases or small mainboards in stock; what are they supposed to do with them? But besides that, what _do_ people think they're getting? If you're the savvy type who would upgrade, you're certainly going to have a look inside; and if not, what does it matter? The specifications are the most important thing, and no effort has been made to hide them. People pay thrice this for handheld devices with as much less in computing power!

What I think we're seeing here in reactions is simple as this: "Durr, Zog see small-small square in big-big rectangle. Ugh, why they put so small-small in so big-big?"

No offense, Neanderthals.

vladistov wrote:Let's pretend HP ends up with a surplus of either large cases or small mainboards in stock; what are they supposed to do with them? But besides that, what _do_ people think they're getting? If you're the savvy type who would upgrade, you're certainly going to have a look inside; and if not, what does it matter? The specifications are the most important thing, and no effort has been made to hide them. People pay thrice this for handheld devices with as much less in computing power!

What I think we're seeing here in reactions is simple as this: "Durr, Zog see small-small square in big-big rectangle. Ugh, why they put so small-small in so big-big?"

No offense, Neanderthals.

If you're not the savvy type, you probably don't understand the specs all that much either, and just look at the box. The box tells people they're getting one thing, when they're really getting something else. Good thing the savvy ones here can tell the un-savvy ones what's up.

Kikuichimoji wrote:No you could not! If you don't buy an OS or a graphics card, then maybe.

Windows 7 Home Premium is $99 for an OEM version of it. A comparable graphics card may be $30 or $40. Could you build a more powerful system for the remaining $149? Case, PSU, CPU, RAM, HDD, Optical?

You could simply go with an FM1 socket thing and use a similar onboard graphics with a faster CPU counterpart, all while being able to add a real graphics card in later. Which is what was meant by expandability.

As to OS, you could even run a linux distro. I've given non-tech people linux before and they actually liked it better. Besides that, I don't know about you, but I've got several vista keys floating around along with one or two win7 keys. Granted, alot of the vista keys are vista basic, but still.

Question about power supply savings:

In fact a smaller power supply on the same PC wastes more energy as heat, as the computer uses the same amount of energy no matter what PSU is used (to the limit of the PSU); however, if a weaker PSU is used, then it is strained moreso, wasting energy in the form of heat compared to a more powerful PSU.

vladistov wrote:What I think we're seeing here in reactions is simple as this: "Durr, Zog see small-small square in big-big rectangle. Ugh, why they put so small-small in so big-big?"

No offense, Neanderthals.

Riiiiight. Because if you bother to consider the value you're getting for your money, then you must be a neanderthal.

Ryfiel wrote:You could simply go with an FM1 socket thing and use a similar onboard graphics with a faster CPU counterpart, all while being able to add a real graphics card in later. Which is what was meant by expandability.

As to OS, you could even run a linux distro. I've given non-tech people linux before and they actually liked it better. Besides that, I don't know about you, but I've got several vista keys floating around along with one or two win7 keys. Granted, alot of the vista keys are vista basic, but still.

You can't design an AMD A-based system for less than the price of this system, unless you used a case and psu you already had, as well as an OS license you already had (or linux).

That kind of defeats the entire purpose of a pre-built system, don't you think?

zdeli001 wrote:Question about power supply savings:

In fact a smaller power supply on the same PC wastes more energy as heat, as the computer uses the same amount of energy no matter what PSU is used (to the limit of the PSU); however, if a weaker PSU is used, then it is strained moreso, wasting energy in the form of heat compared to a more powerful PSU.

To a very small degree, sure, but for the most part, not true. Power supplies have efficiency ratings, which do change depending on load, but not enough to make more than a 2-3W difference in a system like this. The E-series processors are extremely low power, lower than even the Atom platform at idle since the Atom doesn't support Intel Speedstep.

I guarantee if you had this system hooked up to a 250W power supply, sure the PSU would run cooler, but the system itself would use quite a bit more power, since even at the highest PSU efficiency, roughly 25W of that power would be completely wasted.

That link to the sounds of the old dial up internet connection sure brings back a lot of old memories. Not necessarily very good memories, mind you, but still old memories.

zdeli001 wrote:Question about power supply savings:

In fact a smaller power supply on the same PC wastes more energy as heat, as the computer uses the same amount of energy no matter what PSU is used (to the limit of the PSU); however, if a weaker PSU is used, then it is strained moreso, wasting energy in the form of heat compared to a more powerful PSU.

I also forgot, efficiency for PSU's runs in a curve (see http://www.anandtech.com/show/2624/3). There is an optimal region for PSU efficiency. Running a super low-power system like this one with an over powered PSU tends to force the PSU to operate extremely inefficiently, wasting a lot more power.

For example, in that Anandtech link, if you used that 900W PSU to power this system (Let's assume it's 55W and this 65W PSU runs at 85% efficiency), then you would be operating at under 73% efficiency (following the curve, I estimate it as 70%), which means that you would be pulling almost 80 watts from the wall.

I still say this is a much better desktop computer deal and the performance will be much better. Includes Windows 7 Pro.
Deals Woot

Ringo4422 wrote:I still say this is a much better desktop computer deal and the performance will be much better.
Deals Woot

And I still say that the processor performs 15% better (passmark 851 vs this computer's 744), and the computer has less (and slower) RAM, much less (and slower) hard drive space, no DVD burner, a horrendous integrated graphics card, all while using a lot more power and likely being a 3-year old off-lease business computer. Literally the only benefit is that it comes with W7 Professional.

You honestly think that computer will be "much" better?

llocutus wrote:You guys are forgetting that just the OS and HDD alone are worth 180 bucks.

;)

People also seem to be forgetting that this is a refurb.

For 259.99 you can get an eMachines EL1358G-51W Refurbished Desktop PC Athlon II X2 220(2.80GHz) 3GB DDR3 1TB HDD Capacity NVIDIA GeForce 6150 SE Windows 7 Home Premium. Free Shipping and Newegg doesn't apply sales tax.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883114100

ericshmerick wrote:I'm not the smartest poster on the internet but why on earth would anyone buy the less powerful one for the same price?

The graphics cards names are confusing. The benchmarks are better on the 6310 than the 6320. Basically, choose if the CPU or GPU will be your bottleneck!

zdeli001 wrote:Question about power supply savings:

In fact a smaller power supply on the same PC wastes more energy as heat, as the computer uses the same amount of energy no matter what PSU is used (to the limit of the PSU); however, if a weaker PSU is used, then it is strained moreso, wasting energy in the form of heat compared to a more powerful PSU.

Your reasoning is very wrong here. The small supply isn't 'overworking', it is designed differently, for what it can do.


A larger thing can handle more, but it also ADDS overhead, something you completely neglected.

A small bucket that lets you lift 65 pounds of water weighs 5 pounds, and the total is 70. Lifting the same 65 pounds of water with a 20 pound bucket that could handle 250 pounds of water leaves you with 65+20 pounds or 85 total, WASTING energy lifting that extra big bucket you are less fully using.

The bigger inductor to handle more power in the larger supply has it's own larger overhead waste, which will become a larger percentage when you're under using the supply.

Using a 5 pound sledge to drive tacks wastes a ton of extra energy. Things sized correctly to what is actually required are almost always more efficient.

jiggersgreen wrote:Curious why Woot gods removed my post?

One of my posts mysteriously disappeared as well,I guess someone did'nt like my comment about this computer being practically useless!

Buy a computer with better graphics and speed for the same price instead. The i7 and quad-cores are more worth the splurge.

Posting from mine right now. I have the CPU maxed with Prime95 and I'm using 30W. With transfer from optical and using the GPU I never got over 50W. I'll check my Opti 745 at work tomorrow. Win7 performance scores are:

Proc 3.7
Mem: 5.5
AeroGraph: 4.3
GameGraph: 5.8
HD: 5.9