Well here are some benchmarks on Nano vs Atom for Windows XP:
I think the graphics situation for Linux would be quite a bit different, since I never was impressed by the quality of Via's drivers. However you can do XvMC with Via systems, I think, so media performance in Linux would be better, but not close to what it is in XP. Just speculating.
Also I think the Atom's dual core version would be a big advantage. Even if not in raw processing power, but certainly in multitasking and responsiveness.
So the Nano is a bit faster and uses less energy. At least in XP.
The Atom boards used here and those benchmarks are obviously very optimized for price. The killer feature for these Atom + 945G mini-itx boards is that the comparable Via system is as much as 2-3x more expensive.
I think the graphics situation for Linux would be quite a bit different, since I never was impressed by the quality of Via's drivers. However you can do XvMC with Via systems, I think, so media performance in Linux would be better, but not close to what it is in XP. Just speculating.
Also I think the Atom's dual core version would be a big advantage. Even if not in raw processing power, but certainly in multitasking and responsiveness.
So the Nano is a bit faster and uses less energy. At least in XP.
The Atom boards used here and those benchmarks are obviously very optimized for price. The killer feature for these Atom + 945G mini-itx boards is that the comparable Via system is as much as 2-3x more expensive.
Comment