[LAU] Pre-configured Linux Audio laptop for US$499 gets some ink

Giso Grimm gg3137 at vegri.net
Wed Dec 3 03:06:28 EST 2008

Roger E wrote:
> Giso Grimm wrote:
>> Recently I measured the CPU load and battery run time of some low-delay
>> audio DSP on an Asus Eee PC 701 (Intel Celeron M, 630 MHz), and on  an
>> Acer Aspire one (Intel Atom 1.6 GHz). The time spent in the CPU was
>> pretty much the same for both systems, and the battery runtime was
>> between 3 and 3 1/2 hours on the Asus (Celeron) and 2 1/2 hours on the
>> Acer (Atom). Here is the data:
>> algo1
>>   Asus: 56.4% CPU,  3h14' battery
>>   Acer: 51.0% CPU,  2h28' battery
>>   P4:   20.5% CPU
>> algo2
>>   Asus: 49.8% CPU,  3h16' battery
>>   Acer: 47.5% CPU,  2h09' battery
>>   P4:   16.5% CPU
>> algo3
>>   Asus: 36.5% CPU,  3h22' battery
>>   Acer: 35.0% CPU,  2h27' battery
>>   P4:   13.0% CPU
>> jackd
>>   Asus:  6.0% CPU
>>   Acer:  4.8% CPU
>>   P4:    2.2% CPU
>> Sound card IRQ handler
>>   Asus:  4.5% CPU
>>   Acer:  4.2% CPU
>>   P4:    1.0% CPU (network interface with netjack)
>> P4 is Intel Pentium 4 @ 3 GHz. I know this is no perfect benchmarking,
>> but gives an idea of the processor performance.
> Did the Acer have HDD or SSD? Could make the difference in battery time.
> or different battery capacity?
> I ran super_pi 20 to test basic CPU number crunching on my Core2Duo
> E6400 and EeePC900 (Sidux on both systems).:-
> EeePC - 71secs
> C2D - 18.5secs

In my tests both used SSD (the Asus an SSD and additional SD card), and
the lid was closed. The Acer battery says

11.1 V, 2400 mAh, 45 Wh (well, if I multiply capacity and voltage I get
26.6 Wh)

Asus Eee PC 700:

7.4 V, 5200 mAh (this should be 38.5 Wh)

Please note that the Asus in my test was the "old" small one with a
Intel Celeron M. Both hosted an USB soundcard (custom-made hearing aid
research sound card with 4 inputs and 2 outputs), jack was running at 32
kHz and 64 samples/block. The CPU clock was manually switched to
maximum, and both hosted UbuntuStudio 8.04 with a 2.6.24-rt kernel, and
rtirq installed and configured.

I was interessted in the low-delay DSP performance. Desktop performance
of the Acer/Atom is definitely better. "standard" benchmarks say little
about the real-life audio performance (I observed similar with a VIA
Eden board, VIA Esther CPU at 1.2 GHz: The low delay DSP performance is
nearly as good as on my P4, but of course everything else is much
slower, even "normal" floating point processing. The fan-less VIA is a
perfect system for hosting ardour & multichannel recording...).


More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list