Vlc performance on chromebook with ubuntu

[reab2]

[short:]
I'm interested in the performance of the vlc player on chromebooks with a linux distro.
So I would like to ask you if vlc player is properly performing on your chromebook and till what speed the video is remains watchable as in no blurs, green spots or anything else which is not supposed to be in the video (audio is of no interest to me, but post if you want to).
Preferable additional information would be RAM and CPU of your chromebook and info on the video. The videos which I will be watch are .avi's at (I believe) 540p.
If you have any further ideas that might help me, feel free to post them. Also due to the specificness of the question I'm not sure in what more forums I could ask this question.


[long:]
I am a mathematics student from the Netherlands (hence my poor english) and follow some courses which offer the option of video playback. However some of my profs are slow in their writing and most of the time any form of sound is much overrated, thus I download the videos of a lecture and watch it back at approximately 8x speed. This works great for me, but in my current situation I lack any form of laptop or desktop for my studies. I'm interested in the chromebooks, because I do not require much space from my hard drive, but the video acceleration might require some cpu/gpu/ram power. As I lack any proper study in the magical world of hardware requirements vs software performence, I am unaware of the importance of cpu/gpu/ram considering my demand for speed (especially now most cpu's come with integrated graphics and ssd seem to remove demand for ram). The chromebook I'm interested is the HP chromebook 14 g1 with 4gb ram, intel celeron 2955u cpu and 16 or 32gb ssd and appears to be one of the stronger chromebooks available to me. So I'm hoping you could help me compare abstract data to real-life performance.

You have my thanks in advance.

[TheFu]

I have a C720 chromebook with 2G of RAM and 2955u CPU. Swapped out the 16G ssd for a 128G version, wiped ChromeOS and installed Ubuntu Server + openbox as a Win manager. Don't use Unity on a low-end box like this. The graphics support for h.264 video is excellent using default drivers. That means 1080p video plays fine - as the CPU is NOT used at all.

You are mistaken if you think SSD replaces RAM.

I would NOT buy this (or any) chromebook again. The keyboard layout is extremely flawed, IHMO. Plus I had to get addons for
* larger SSD,
* Ethernet,
* external disk drives
to make this device useful.
For $280, a Dell 11-13inch (like the Dell Inspiron 11 i3137-3751sLV) would be better, smarter, and only a tiny bit thicker - while allowing upgrades to 8G of RAM. Plus the 500G drive, ethernet port and normal keyboard would be really nice. The locked BIOS of chromebooks is a hassle and having to break the warranty to swap the storage bothers me too. Get the Dell, dude. Last Xmas, that model was $180 - wish I'd been looking then.

I 100% agree on this specific CPU - LOVE IT - and would buy another system with it again. The 8+ hrs of battery life is true. I haven't followed what any newer CPUs support for battery life. That CPU will easily handle AVI/xvid at 540p - my old Asus Eee with an N280 Atom handled playback of 600p fine avi/xvid, but nothing higher. This newer CPU is at least 5x faster. It won't be an issue. I really like this celeron - the CPU comparison website say is about as fast as a 1st-gen Core i5 mobile processor, which I have too. I believe it. Intel has too many lines of similar, but not the same CPUs. I don't know the diff between a Celeron mobile, Pentium, or Core processor anymore. I knw the Core i3/i5/i7 differences - those are clearer. It is just the lower end that I find confusing.

Sorry - I don't really use VLC on it too much and almost never watch AVI videos anymore. Most hidef videos on the web are h.264 - handled in the onboard GPU hardware. I get why you asked, just can't say that I've tested that codec or resolution on this machine.

Your English doesn't seem non-native to me.

[tgalati4]

I love how Intel rates their own processors with **, ***, **** in computer advertisements. How come I never see any 1-star stickers?

There are several processors in the Intel line that soundly get a 1-star rating.

Although it is true that you can listen at 2 to 3 times faster and get 90% of the content of a lecture, I'm not sure at 8X what the retention would be.

A used Thinkpad X-series would also be useful around campus because it is tough, has Cold War-styling, and runs linux well.

[reab2]

Thnx for the quick replies.

@TheFu
My best guess at this moment is that the information exchange between ssd and ram is significantly faster (compared to hdd and ram), thus the need for large amounts of ram has decreased. But your suggestion on the Dell tells me that large amounts of ram might still be useful.
Btw, thanks for your detailed answer, it helped a lot for clarity on my current situation.

@tgalati4
I fondly remember the legendary Thinkpad stories that my friends told me, as they do seem to be made for a Cold War v2. But my experience tells me that a computer or laptop doesn't survive much longer than 5 years. But I have no idea what the average survival time is of a Thinkpad in the hands of a random person. I will keep my eyes open on that front though, maybe there lies a hidden gem there anyway.

[tgalati4]

No used thinkpads in Amsterdam, but there is a nice 12" Mac. Needs a new hard drive: http://amsterdam.craigslist.org/sys/4668689137.html

[reab2]

The problem is solved (for me at least). We don't use craigslist that much in the Netherlands. For second hand sales we have a website called marktplaats (translated: marketplace or market) and I found with a bit of luck a second hand lenovo t440 in my pricerange. Needless to say that I've been busy with the required installations that kept me from replying. Anyway, thanks for going the extra mile and I'll be seeing you guys soon when my ubuntu installation has finished.