HP Mini 5103: Looking at the Dual-Core Atom N550
by Jarred Walton on December 17, 2010 1:05 PM ESTConclusion: The Mini 5103 Is Decent, but Dual-Core Atom Isn’t Enough
Let’s start by focusing on the components we’re testing today. The Atom N550 is currently the fastest netbook Atom processor in terms of overall performance, with two cores plus Hyper-Threading. The lower 1.50GHz clock speed does put it behind single-core Atom CPUs in a few areas, but in general it’s a performance improvement. That’s the good news. The bad news is that overall power requirements put it very close to the old CULV SU4100/SU7300 processors, based on our battery life results, and such systems manage roughly double the CPU performance with better graphics (specifically video decoding) support as well. Given the alternatives already out there for more than a year, the only major selling point for N550 we can see is if you want a 10” or smaller chassis. There’s also pricing, which starts at around $350 on other N550 equipped netbooks, but don’t forget to factor in the RAM, HDD, OS, and other benefits that generally come with CULV laptops.
Looking just at the performance side of things, then, the current Atom landscape fails to impress. Intel knows this, and so do the manufacturers, which is why the focus with netbooks now is more about providing an inexpensive secondary mobile device where you can access all of your regular programs and data, albeit slowly. HP certainly puts a lot of emphasis on those areas, with a fast Gigabit Ethernet connection and their QuickSync software providing an easy way to make sure all your important content is ready for you to grab and go. Syncing still takes longer than we’d expect, especially when you initially set things up: we saw network transfer speeds of anywhere from 1-2MB/s up to 15-20MB/s over a Gigabit switch, compared to standard file copies in the 45+MB/s range. Once the initial sync is complete, however, the Mini 5103 will stay current a lot easier.
In terms of improvements, outside of Atom getting faster/better (which should happen towards the end of 2011), the one area we would like to see addressed on the 5103 design is the battery. The small 4-cell battery is simply too small in our opinion, and while some users will like the slightly lighter weight it brings, the bigger issue is with the 6-cell battery sticking out the bottom of the chassis. If HP can figure out a way to make the 6-cell battery fit flush with the chassis, that would address the only major complaint we have with the design. Of course, other improvements are possible; the default install has a lot of extra software running—like the above ProtectTools, QuickSync, etc. It’s Catch-22, but extra processes running on Atom makes for an even slower computing experience. We recommend keeping it lean and clean, but perhaps business users prefer the extra utilities.
Features like the above are why the Mini 5103 targets the business sector, and it’s why HP is willing to put a lot more money into build quality and materials. The result is definitely pleasing, but the added cost can be a tough pill to swallow. The basic Mini 5103 starts at just under $400 online, with 1GB RAM and an N455 CPU. You can grab a Lenovo IdeaPad with similar specs for about $100 less (but without Bluetooth). Take the 5103 up to 2GB and an N550 CPU like our test unit, toss in a 768p display, and the regular price (i.e. no special discounts applied) is $632. Finding similar features in other netbooks is a bit difficult, but you can get the Samsung NF310 with a 1366x768 display, N550, and 1GB RAM for around $380; upgrading the memory to 2GB should only cost an additional $25. So again, we’re back to features.
If you’re after an attractive and well-built netbook with business class features like HP’s QuickSync, HP’s ProtectTools Security Manager, and WWAN connectivity, the Mini 5103 doesn’t really have much in the way of direct netbook competition. However, as tested it ships with a price north of $600, putting it into competition with plenty of other laptops. Given the incremental increase in performance that the N550 offers combined with the substantially higher price if you custom configure a Mini 5103, we recommend sticking with the base model and keeping the price down.
Looking at the bigger picture, given HP’s various AMD-based laptop offerings—they’re one of the better sources for AMD laptops and notebooks—we also expect to see them jump on the Brazos bandwagon next year. That could mean improved performance in every area relative to Atom, hopefully without sacrificing battery life. It will be interesting to see if HP is willing to make a “business netbook” like the 5103 based on Brazos, or if they continue to stick with Intel offerings for business products.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
57 Comments
View All Comments
puffpio - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
Can I ask a question? Something I always wondered at Anandtech.When I flip from page to page in this review, the machines being compared in the charts are never the same. For example: The Macbook Pro is not included in the battery life charts but it's in the performance charts and display charts. But it's also never mentioned why the items in the charts vary from page to page..
I have noticed this in other articles as well. My first thought is that it would 1) skew the results too much to make the graph unreadable, or 2) the data is not available. But a more nefarious reason would be to cherry pick competitors to make the graph say what you want it to say.
Thanks for any insight
Stuka87 - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
Hmm, I see the Apple MacBook Pro 13 in all the battery results?JarredWalton - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
The simple explanation for data missing from various reviews is that we either didn't have it, or we didn't choose to include it in a particular review for one reason or another. For laptops, if we've reviewed a laptop in the past, the usual reason it's not included is simply to avoid bloating the graphs. We have an "unofficial" decision to try to keep graphs to around 10 items to make them readable (at least for laptops). So, as we review new laptops we sort of arbitrarily remove older units from the charts. I try to keep relevant items in the charts, though, which is why the 5102 is there, along with single-core CULV, dual-core CULV, the i3-330UM UL80Jt, 1215N, 1001P, etc. -- basically one each (at least) of the various platforms.As for how the charts are created, I do need to take some time at some point to make things easier. Right now, we use spreadsheets with results for the various laptops. I have netbook, entry, midrange, and high-end spreadsheets floating around -- multiple revisions of each. Vivek and Dustin have the same thing. So when it's time for a new article, I need to try to collate results from two or three spreadsheets, then add in the results for the test laptop. It's a bit of a pain, and that's why Vivek and Dustin often include different laptops in their reviews.
So now, after writing this, I think I'm going to go fool around with a database and see if I can make something that will handle all our needs better....
pjkenned - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
$700 for a dual core Atom netbook versus $1,000 for a Macbook Air 11.6" (base). It would be cool to see a comparison because the larger 13" Apple designs are targeting full-feature notebooks instead of ultraportable/ netbooks.vol7ron - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
I think this netbook has the right idea w/ features. I also think it's $200 more than what it's base and configured prices should be. I wonder if there would still be a profit if they knocked $200 off the price."just in case you want to watch a 1080p H.264 movie on your 10.1” LCD"
The article makes it seem like no one would want this. I had a portable DVD player that was smaller than this. I would like this feature. It's especially nice for on-the-go, or people who work at places that have a lot of downtime.
JarredWalton - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
You can do 720p fine without the CrystalHD was sort of my point. Anyway, I'm not saying the ability is bad, but I'm saying the cost for that feature is too much. $100 to do a configurable model, and then $45 more for CrystalHD. I'd rather just get an NG-ION chip in there, or a CULV laptop instead.vol7ron - Monday, December 20, 2010 - link
I agree with this statement. While I don't have a problem with 1080p, I'm not sure why it's being pushed so hard. 720p is still acceptable, especially given the price differential as you mentioned.While I somewhat understand the nature of the dimensions (small device + wide keyboard + 1080p for HD video), I still do not completely understand why this is the majority decision.
Still, great article, great product, just hopefully they'll find some way to knock the $$ down.
blueboy_10 - Thursday, December 23, 2010 - link
Exactly. I'd jump at the chance to have an 1215N over this netbook, simply for the fact the fact that it has ION it. I'm a little annoyed over the fact that it does hit on battery life, but really it doesn't impact on the battery life as much as I thought, cause my Toshiba Satellite iCore 3-eqipped has about roughly the same amount of battery life as the 1215N does, so I'm not really losing anything. BTW, the CULV laptops are very good in comparison, but I like the smaller footprint that these netbooks provide. Don't get me wrong, this machine is a sound machine with basic features, but there are better choices out there for the price. It's good to check around for prices on the net, who knows, you might find a good deal. This is my thoughts on this. - BLUEBOYTaft12 - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
I'd love to see 768 vertical pixels become available on more netbooks, but if you can buy 3 other netbooks for the price of this one, a vendor has forgotten the definition of the word netbook.Don't blame the dual-core CPU for inflating the price, the 1K unit price of the N550 is $22 more than N455.
This will be the marketplace failure it deserves to be.
mino - Friday, December 17, 2010 - link
On another note, why are there exactly zero SoC Atom's in Bench?Also, why do you generally not include mobile CPU's in Bench?
I mean, what are 10 flavors of Athlon II X2 good for with no numbers for e.g. K625 ?
Same goes for i* stuff.