We’ve got a bridal shower here at house today, so in preparation for that I’ve had little time this weekend to play with Samwise, the new Samsung Q1 Ultra Premium. However, I have to say that I’m still very impressed with this device; more than I originally thought I’d be. It was hard to get a feel for performance in the few minutes we played with the device at CES. After using the device for less than 10 hours, I think I can form a first general opinion that might help folks decide if this is the device for them:“If you’re looking for a UMPC form factor with the performance of a solid notebook, this is definitely a contender. If you don’t need notebook-like performance 100% of the time, then the A110-powered units should be considered”.
Why do I say that? Because the processor in the Q1 Ultra Premium truly is a notebook processor. I mentioned this in a comment prior, but let me explain a little bit because the CPU is the key differentiator between the Q1U and the Q1U Premium.The Intel Core Solo used in the Q1U Premium runs at 1.33 GHz, has a 533MHz front side bus speed and includes 2 MB of L2 cache memory on the chip. The Intel A110 CPU used in the Q1U devices run at either 600- or 800 MHz, have a 400 MHz front side bus speed and include only 512 KB of L2 cache. Since we’re chatting about CPUs, it’s probably worth a mention that the new Intel Atom CPUs will run at up to 1.8 GHz on only 2.5 Watts. My understanding is that will have the faster 533 MHz front side bus like the Core Solo, but only 512 KB of cache like the A110.So why would someone want an A110 vs. a Core Solo? The performance for battery life tradeoff. The A110 chips use up to 3 Watts of power, while the Core Solo uses nearly double: 5.5 Watts. The reason I’m seeing 6+ hours of battery life on the Q1U Premium is mainly due to the high-capacity 6-cell battery…Hopefully this info explains my statement above and of course, all of this assumes you like the form factor of this particular device. If not, then the CPU options don’t mean much. ;) I’ll be running benchmarks and such over the next week, but I wanted to share my first thoughts on performance as that’s usually one of the first aspects people ask about.Part of the reason I purchased this device from CDW was due to their liberal return policy, but I’ve already decided that I’ll be keeping the device. In fact, I just ordered a second 6-cell battery and a 2 GB RAM stick. The battery was around $98 and the RAM was $55. Combined, they’ll boost my productivity by turning this UMPC into an all day device. This also means that when I put my Q1P up for sale (later this week probably), I *will* be including the 2 GB RAM that’s currently in it so you won’t have to worry about the upgrade.More to follow if time allows today… with 30 ladies due to arrive here in about an hour or so, I have to go get my Hugh Hefner bathrobe on. ;)
Q1 Ultra Premium performance: impressions and info
Summary:
We’ve got a bridal shower here at house today, so in preparation for that I’ve had little time this weekend to play with Samwise, the new Samsung Q1 Ultra Premium. However, I have to say that I’m still very impressed with this device; more than I […]
sorry i am not trying to insult you, but until you test it with Vista this opinion just doesnt mean much. even the A110 unit i had absolutely flyed with XP Tablet, almost everything performs well with XP.
Vista is MUCH more resource heavy than XP & until you get some performance comparison while running it then it’s still really unsure what this unit can actually do. even your master James said he has never used a non-dualcore device that could run Vista well. unless now he is going to take that back or use trick wording to back away from that statement? but honestly, i do hope that it will perform well with it.
Kinra, I agree with everything that Kevin said here. The largest impact on Vista is definitely having at least 2 GB of RAM, I’m on record for saying that repeatedly. Some single core processors may handle Vista fine with that much RAM or more, but without the 2 GB forget it. I stand by my assessment that Core 2 Duo processors are needed to be sure that Vista performs well but with 2 GB of RAM even some Core Solo processors can likely handle it, at least well enough to be productive.
I don’t use trick words to twist things I say later.
I am not Kevin’s (nor anyone else’s) master and in spite of your intentions it’s insulting for you to say that.
agreed, XP is not a test what-so-ever. we all know XP runs well on almost anything, just look at all the old hardware we used to run it on. my 1st XP machine was a lowend P3 & XP flew on it. OBVIOUSLY XP is going to run well on a 1.33Mhz Core Solo, so did the A110, so wheres the news here?
you need to step it up with a current OS like Vista to truly test how it runs in modern day.
I appreciate the most of commentary above, but let me clear up the initial point here. I’m trying to provide people with the information and understanding of the different CPUs in an out-of-the-box device. I’m certainly aware of the challenges that Vista has offered UMPCs. Feel free to search our site for Vista and UMPC; you’ll find that I’ve been running Vista on UMPCs since *before* Vista was released to the public. That was on a 900 MHz Celeron device in the fall of 2006. Since January of 2007, I’ve been happily running Vista on a Q1P with a 1.0 GHz Pentium M, although I upgraded the RAM to 2 GB, something I recommend anyone running Vista on a UMPC to do if they can.
I will certainly be installing Vista on this machine but not everyone will buy this device and then purchase a Vista license to use on it. These people will benefit from impressions of XP Tablet Edition, so the first week will be using the device with XPTE.
I also find the first comment personally insulting and uncalled for. Let’s keep it clean going forward, shall we?
when are you going to test it with Vista? i do hope it runs well. but right now its like a heavy-weight boxer (Core Solo) taking on a light-weight boxer (XP). i want to see the match between heavyweights only, Core Solo vs Vista.
i do agree with the previous posts, Vista is a resource hogging whore. but it’s a great way to test the muscle of any machine. i do so love XP, in comparison it was such a lightweight diverse OS for nearly any hardware.
i do slightly disagree with you James, although 2GB RAM does help with Vista. your CPU & GPU performance are MUCH more important factors when running it.
i think he was joking with the master comment lol, try to remember that everybodys 1st language isnt english.
Kevran, in the video Kevin states he is going to load Vista soon and report about that so just hang on and it will come.
We will have to disagree, I have run Vista on many, many devices with many different processors and 2 GB of RAM is the single largest factor contributing to how well Vista runs. The processor is important too but even with a good processor I’ve never seen Vista run acceptably with only 1 GB of RAM.
I do understand that English is not everyone’s first language but when someone starts their comment with “I am not trying to insult you” and then continues to do so it is clear they realized their comment could be taken that way. In that case they shouldn’t even make it IMHO.
I personally have never come across the ‘resource heavy’ issues of Vista on any reasonably modern kit. For example I’m currently running Vista Business on the HTC Shift and it’s absolutely fine, MS Office, DivX, Paint.net all running quite happily. Sure, I could load the CPU with intensive tasks but for day to day use, absolutely fine and I know the Samsung will be great with Vista, especially after Superfetch (the cause of the ‘resource heavy, where has all my ram gone’ myth) does its job after a few days intensive use.
i have my doubts as to how this unit will handle Vista as well, because i was not pleased with Vista’s performance under my 1.2ghz machine. i do wonder though Kevin, if once you install Vista on it if you will be able to be fair in your judgment especially after your initial positive impressions. you seem easy to please since you liked the performance on your 900mhz Celeron. but it seems odd to me you didnt like performance on a 800mhz A110 that was an almost clock-for-clock clone of the P-M series (8% performance decrease in most CPU specific benchmarks i saw). the performance difference between clock cycle equals of a 900mhz & 800mhz unit at best would be negligible. it might make some question your tech knowledge & if maybe some other prejudice wasnt what resulted in your negative opinion (like the fact you wanted the successor UMPC’s to have better performance & run longer **instead of** similar performance & run longer).
in the US the word master often has a negative connotation due to the popularity of the word created by the “bondage scene”. in many other countries the master/apprentice relationship is 1 of great admiration & respect. he probably just meant master for James because this is afterall JKontherun & he is the originator of the site. the comment about retracting statements or using creative wording to back away (like politicians do) is fair, it’s a natural human occurrence & people should be skeptical.
Kevin, are you going to provide video footage of your Playboy Mansion party? Does your bathrobe have pockets large enough for Samwise? ;)
I admire Samsung for increasing the processor power on this device but I’d wish they sort of the ergonomics. Most people dont want slates for umpcs, they want thumbboards or mini keyboards