I'm looking to get a netbook replacement this Friday. My Dell Mini (with the Atom 1.3 GHz) sorta didn't live up to expectations, since the built-in GMA 500 video chipset is clocked at a whopping 100 MHz. I think the Dell *could* have been okay with a GMA 3100 or a GMA 4500. But as-is, It has trouble drawing menu bars, and it plays video at about six frames per second.
So, I have my eye on a 13" Toshiba as a netbook replacement. It features an ATI 3200 HD video chipset. On notebookcheck.com, the ATI 3200 rates a score of 2400, whereas the GMA 500 rates a score of 137, so I think it'll be fine as far as graphics are concerned. But my question is this: There's a $50 difference between getting a dual-core Athlon Neo 1.6 GHz and a dual-core Turion Neo 1.6 GHz. For the life of me, I've been researching for days and can't find out the difference between the two CPUs in order to determine if it's worth it to spend the extra $50. I'm not buying a powerhouse computer. I'm basically looking for a more-capable netbook.