• What
    is this?
    You've landed on the AMD Portal on AnandTech. This section is sponsored by AMD. It features a collection of all of our independent AMD content, as well as Tweets & News from AMD directly. AMD will also be running a couple of huge giveaways here so check back for those.
    PRESENTED BY
POST A COMMENT

106 Comments

Back to Article

  • creathir - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    It should be interesting to see how efficient these chips are under load. Could we be seeing the development of a pretty slick tablet platform here?

    Did you enjoy your time in Austin? It is such a beautiful place. Next time you're down this way ya need to take a drive out to Lost Maples State Park (about an hour west of San Antonio)

    It's very nice.

    Look forward to the performance numbers...
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    So the 9W TDP Ontario products will have Bobcat running at only 1-1.2Ghz? Lol, so much for all the AMD forum hype that Bobcat would "own" Atom.

    I think another problem with the 18W Zacate products is that they will compete with the low-end Celeron and Pentium chips. Intel may update their lineup and replace the Celerons/Pentiums with low end i3 models.

    As expected, Bobcat will not even come close to 2Ghz clock rates.

    Based on the data here in this article, Bobcat may not be the home run some people are expecting it to be.
    Reply
  • cyrusfox - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    There is so much fail in your statement. You think because ontario has a slower processor speed then atom (1Ghz to 1.6Ghz) That the atom processor is more powerfulI highly doubt Atom will have more CPU processing power than ontario. But even if atom is still more powerful in CPU compute, its crippled IGP brings it to its knees on any sort of multimedia. Ontario with its fusion APU will feel like it blows atoms out of the water as it seamlessly handles all the media you throw at it. This is huge for consumer satisfaction. Much more important than how fast it can compute super Pi. Reply
  • AnandThenMan - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Atom is a dog, both on the CPU and GPU side. Ever use an Atom based system? You need the long battery life, because it takes you forever to do anything. And forget about anything other than very basic graphics on the Atom.

    Atom based systems have a very high return rate because of this.
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Except you're forgetting future Atom platforms will be system-on-a-chip designs. All future Atoms will be far more integrated than Ontario or Zacate platforms, because Ontario and Zacate will not be system-on-a-chip designs.

    The 9W Bobcats will compete with Atom, but the 18W products will compete with Celerons, Pentiums, and low-end i3s.

    All Intel has to do is put a good GPU into future Atom SoC designs and whatever advantage Bobcat may have is negated. On that note, let's wait and see how the GPU is on future Atom platforms.
    Reply
  • Jamahl - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    A good gpu from intel? How far into the future are we talking about here? Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Sandy Bridge's integrated GPU will perform at roughly Geforce 310M performance levels, which is "good enough" for most average people. I don't think it would be very hard for Intel to integrate that GPU somehow with Atom in an SoC design. Reply
  • Prosthetic Head - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Just to point out here that AMD can easily integrate bobcat cores in to SoCs. They are being manufactured by TSMC and will shortly get even smaller and more efficient with a process shrink. AMD specifically negotiated the right to outsource manufacture and to sub-licence x86 technology in their recent settlement with Intel. That suggests to me that they do in fact intend to manufacture or licence out an x86 SoC design. Reply
  • meksta - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Except you are forgetting that you are comparing apples to oranges.

    Why would the 18W products compete with Celerons and Pentiums and I3s? If so, then you have to combine a southbridge and/or GPU into your calculations......oh how much will that work out to be?
    Reply
  • taltamir - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    Why would the 18W products compete with Celerons and Pentiums and I3s

    Because they have similar power consumption. The intel ultra low power or whatever they call it now i3s reach such low power consumption levels.
    but it requires intel to massively cut down clockspeed, and also to compete with a large expensive chip. The point of the atom is that its so damn small, this makes it really really cheap for intel to manufacture, thus increasing their margins. Could intel bring us an i3 with an extremely low clockspeed and power? yes...
    will intel do that? probably not.
    Reply
  • flyck - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Don't forget the chip is manufactured on 40nm. I believe ontario platform released will be ok for the current market. The GF 28nm node for the next models will be the thing that will make ontario succeed or fail. Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    By the time the next models on 28mm come out, Atom will be redesigned for out-of-order execution, and ultra low voltage Ivy Bridge models will likely be on sale at the low-end. Reply
  • mino - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Cheap Ivy Bridge, powerful yet low power Intel IGP, ... Atom faster that Bobcat ...
    I do not know what you are smoking, but it must be good.

    There will be no cheap low power IB. Well, not before 2013.
    Ontario #2 is here Q1 2012. How about that.

    /end troll reply
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Ontario #2 will be here Q1 2012? Really? Is that the one on the 28nm process? Somehow I doubt that AMD will release it at that time.

    Point is, I wouldn't be so sure of Bobcat being a huge success. Let's wait and see what happens shall we?
    Reply
  • mino - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Yes, the 28nm one.

    Bobcat is the right design for the right market at the right time (even pulled in quarter!) for a great price.

    There is possibly no way for it to not succeed. The question remains, how much.
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Low-end laptops mostly use Celerons and Pentiums. I don't see Bobcat changing that situation much.

    Bobcat could do well with netbooks, except there is a problem. Netbook market share is declining, mainly due to the iPad.

    So in reality, Bobcat has to compete not just with Intel, but also with Apple.

    The only other viable market might be the HTPC market. That is not a very big market though, and Intel is pushing hard in that market as of now.
    Reply
  • sprockkets - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Why? The whole point of atom is ultra low power usage in devices like phones where ARM dominates.

    Never going to happen.
    Reply
  • Kiijibari - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    You forget the fundamentally difference between Atom and Bobcat:
    Bobcat is a OoO CPU, Atom is a InOrder CPU.

    Therefore Bobcat will have a much higher performance per clock. If 500 Mhz clock advantage is enough for Atom to beat Bobcat has to be seen.

    You might compare that to the i5-760 vs. Phenom2 955/965 situation. Even though the Phenoms run at higher clocks, they are not faster as the lower clocked i5. That's because the i5 has a higher IPC, too. In that case not because of OoO <> InO, but that doesn't matter for the comparison.
    Reply
  • mino - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Actually we have a wery good comparison available right on the market. It is even hinted in the article.

    Just take 1,3GHz CULV C2D, pair it with a lower clocked 5450 and we are in the ballpark of 18W ontario give or take 10%.

    Now we just need to remember where Atom stands relative to C2D ...
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Atom will improve, Intel won't be sitting still. Reply
  • meksta - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    So everyone besides Intel sits still? What a pointless comment. Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    What a pointless reply. Mino's reply assumes that Atom will remain in-order, which it will NOT. Atom will be redesigned for out-of-order in 2012. Reply
  • mino - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    For most of (if not all of) the Ontario market life Atom WILL remain in-order. That is a public information from Intel itself. Reply
  • sprockkets - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    why? Intel hates atom. It kills their higher margin CPUs. They want that for phones and tablets, not full blown PCs.

    If anything, AMD is the only reason Atom will improve. Heck, Intel's atom is so lame that on their own Meego platform, they can't even provide decent video drivers because the video card portion is 3rd party.

    Oh no! What will happen if someone like AMD or nvidia got their hands on their video tech through their open source drivers!
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Who said we were talking about "full blown PCs"? Obviously Atom is only meant for small devices like netbooks. Ontario Bobcats are aimed at a similar market.

    Also I fail to see how Intel "hates" Atom. Why would they develop it in the first place? Why would Intel be pushing Atom SoCs to market so hard? Your comment makes no sense.

    Intel LIKES Atom and they are trying to use Atom to take away some of ARM's marketshare.
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Future Atoms will be mostly SoC designs, while the Bobcat platforms are not. Zacate Bobcats will compete with Celeron and Pentium models anyways, not Atom. Ontario Bobcats will compete with Atoms. While Bobcat will have a per-clock advantage over Atom, it remains to be seen how Bobcat will perform when compared to Celeron and Pentium systems.

    We're not just talking about a 500 Mhz clock difference here though. The Intel Z560 Atom already runs at 2.13 Ghz, although it is a single core design. The Atom D525 dual core runs at 1.8 Ghz. That is a clock difference of 600-800 Mhz compared to the Ontario Bobcats.
    Reply
  • bigboxes - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Calm down fanboi. Your quest is to protect your damsel Intel from harm to her reputation. We get it. Reply
  • krumme - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Atom D525 is 13W TDP, 87mm2 and more expensive packaging than zakate. Get the facts dude, zakate is cheaper than Atom and as you say near core 2 speed. Wellcome the the new wold. As zakate is cheaper than Atom, Intel can not use core i whatever or something more expensive, because they will loose tons of money doing so. Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Facts? Nice assumptions you have there. Can you show us all *FACTUAL* proof that Zacate is cheaper than Atom? If you can't, I would stop listing your assumptions as "facts". Reply
  • iwodo - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    He is referring to 87mm2 and 75mm2 die size. Smaller Die Size means Cheaper. Reply
  • khimera2000 - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    and to match atoms Visual performance you will have to add in a nvidia card, which means on its own the atom missess out since smart users will want to use the power of there video cards to accelerate there daily tasks. Im already using it in microsoft office, the beta of IE8 and BETA firefox.

    Truth is intel does not have an image for fast video cards, and thats probably going to hurt the more in the long run then AMD's rep for making a good alternative.
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    Can you show me concrete proof that is is cheaper for AMD specifically to make a 75mm2 chip than it is for Intel to make an 87mm2 chip? We can assume its cheaper, but we have no concrete facts to back this up. The die size difference between 75 and 87 is negligible. Reply
  • nafhan - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    The i3 is a bigger more complicated chip and package (MCM). The ULV i3's are in the same power envelope (18W), but by moving to an i3 you'd be trading GPU power and (at least to Intel) a higher price for additional CPU power. So, depending on the application, it might not be an upgrade.
    Also, with the Ontario vs. Atom, it's again going to be about the GPU. Probably very similar CPU power with much improved GPU capabilities.
    Even if it's not a "home run", it's AMD leveraging their expertise and hitting Intel where they have a hole in their lineup.
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Yes, until Intel covers that hole, and we are back to the usual state of things, AMD being behind Intel. Reply
  • Prosthetic Head - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Sorry, but you seem to be totally missing the point. The architectural differences mean that even at 1GHz bobcat is very likely to beat the 1.6GHz atom, even in most CPU bound workloads. Atom is an incredibly poorly performing 'in order' architecture.

    What you are saying is not much better than kids back in 2003 saying that "a 2.8GHz P4 Celeron MUST beat a 1.8GHz Athlon64 because its got over 1/3rd more GHz!!!"

    The graphics system is also very important for the target market, a mediocre system can still feel very snappy in most likely usage scenarios provided it has a capable graphics subsystem. Now that many of the highly CPU bound media tasks (HD playback, transcoding, compression) are starting to make use of gpGPUs that will become even more important. Intel may POSSIBLY be able to get adequate 2d/3d acceleration working and integrated soon, but they are very far behind AMD here and have never marketed a CUDA/Stream/OpenCL capable chip and driver - thats a lot of catch-up work to do.
    Reply
  • MFK - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Wish I could up-vote you like Reddit/Engadget.
    But yeah, basically what I was gonna say.
    Reply
  • nitrousoxide - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    P4 is running at almost 3 times the frequency of Athlon64...don't forget that its ALU runs at double frequency of the core (5.6GHz for a 2.8GHz P4) Reply
  • jollyjugg - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link

    Except what you are forgetting is that Bobcat is an out of order core and Atom is an inorder core. There is a lot of difference between these styles of architectures. What matters is not entirely the clock speed but also IPC. Only running a CPU at a higher frequency would be a brute force approach. Out of order processor has a much higher IPC than in order processor. Hence dont under estimate the CPU yet until you have seen Anand's promised performance numbers next week. Also however the CPU turns out, it is a real boon for people in the netbook segment to get a good graphics. People are frustrated with Intel's sucked up graphics and their over priced Atom based systems which hardly measure up to anything. It may not be something that turns the world upside down. But nevertheless it will be something that will be very welcome. We should also not forget that fusion is in their initial stages. It will get better with time.

    This is one thing Intel will take a long time catching up Graphics!!!!!! We may never know. Visual experience is something which is very powerful. It captures people's imagination. At an outset iphone and another phone may look the same. But its the performance that is the clincher. If this performs this is clinch for sure.
    Reply
  • SteelCity1981 - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    If it's based on the Evergreen architecture then why not just call it Radeon 5310 and 5250 series? Just confusing to call a Radeon GPU a 6310 and a 6250 when it's based on the Radeon 5 series. Especially considering there will be no new Radeon 6 series that will come out lower then the 6800 series. Reply
  • mino - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Well, 6800 series itself is heavily based on the 5000 series so ...

    It is all just branding. And, there WILL be more 6000 series parts. Llano being a confirmed one with at least Turks on the table as well.
    Reply
  • Zingam - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Now that's a picture I like a lot! It is so nerdy! :D Reply
  • Mr Perfect - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    The picture of the test setup? Yeah, I like the Pro Networking! "Faceplates? We don't need no stinking faceplates!" Reply
  • Markstar - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    ...is when I can see something like this for the Desktop. Obviously this would be awesome

    Also, it becomes pretty apparent that AMD is falling behind more and more when it comes to the manufacturing process. TSMC's troubled 40nm process just doesn't cut it anymore and AMD's own process is pretty far behind as well.

    Also, while I often tell people that they don't need to replace their 4 year old computer to check emails, 1/1.2GHz does sound a little low.
    Reply
  • mino - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Q1, there are plenty of ITX designs in the pipe. I just hope someone is smart enough to do a bunch of mATX ones too.

    Nobody is proposing the 9W for desktops. Also, 1Ghz dual Bobcat shall be in the ballpark of "high-end" Atoms as far as GUI "snappiness" goes.
    Reply
  • jabber - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    I've been using a dual core 1.3GHz CULV setup for the past year and its been perfect.

    I cant tell any day to day difference between it and my 3.4GHz quadcore box.

    The need for more CPU power for the day to day tasks mentioned in the article past a long time ago.

    The 1.3GHz CULV benches almost as fast as a 3GHz P4D from a few years back. Plenty fast enough.

    Remember this platform is aimed at mum and dad boxes. Also I've been farming out dual core Atom ION boxes for office use the past year. Had nothing but positive feedback. Customers love them. Big step up from all those 3GHz single core P4 or AthlonXP boxes they struggled with before.

    All hail efficent low power for the mainstream.
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    That's going to be a potential problem for AMD. If people like their Atom boxes, what would entice them to switch to AMD Ontario or Zacate boxes? Reply
  • jabber - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Not sure thats an issue.

    Its about appealing to those that havent made any switch yet.

    If my customer base is anything to go by there are masses of folks out there struggling along with 3GHz P4 boxes with 512MB of ram and 80GB slow HDDs

    They think thats average PC performance. Give them anything under $500 new off the shelf and its a revelation to them.

    We really will see a clear divergance of PC use over the next two years.

    There will be the small group of hardcore gamers and benchmark junkies.

    There will be the small group of specialists/developers/number crunchers.

    Then there will be the rest whose CPU needs were met a long time ago and just need the ideal rounded package of CPU/GPU/Media to take care of them.
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    A lot of average people haven't even moved completely to HD videos yet. Current P4 boxes are actually enough for more people than you think.

    A Celeron or Atom box is enough for a lot of people. You're making an assumption that a large group of buyers *want* something more powerful than an Atom or Celeron, which are the price points Bobcat is aiming at. I think it's debatable how large such a group is.
    Reply
  • khimera2000 - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    I think that it will do well. sub 500 sounds fine, and i think there will be a significant group of people who will by this for there kids as there first machine. My brother go an atom job for his son and he hasent even broken out of grade school yet.

    for the old and intrench.. might be a struggle but for the younger kids i think AMD will do well since they spend most of the time farming on facebook, which will help with gpgpu and the 6xxx vid card.
    Reply
  • Zoomer - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    The Sim 5000. Reply
  • Zoomer - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Sorry. I meant:
    The Sims 5000
    Reply
  • dayanth - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    How fast it can run Minecraft? Reply
  • Freddo - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Really curious how well AMD C-50 will run 1080p H.264 videos, like this 1080p60 encode video from Digital Foundry; http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-f...

    If it can run it well, I will be sure to buy one AMD C-50 netbook next year, and use it as a HTPC. Also, it should obviously have HDMI for that, and preferably a good metal build quality.
    Reply
  • Freddo - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Oh, and how well it can run a PS1 emulator. Reply
  • Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    You mean a PS2 emulator? Anything should be able to run a PS1 emulator. I dont mess with ps1, but when I run the N64 emulator, I get literally 0% cpu usage from it. Reply
  • Freddo - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    Nope, I mean a PS1 emulator.

    I remember it's not working well on my 833Mhz computer from 2000, but it worked fine on my 1.5GHz computer from 2002.

    And AMD C-50 got two 1.0GHz cores.
    Reply
  • khimera2000 - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    since the PS1 emulator runs relatively fine on a PSP i dont think it will be an issue. Reply
  • iwod - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    I have a Pentium M 1.8Ghz with Radeon X1600M Laptop. I wonder if the Top Range Dual Core 1.6Ghz Bobcat with 500Mhz 6310 will beat my Laptop Performance, which i considered to be capable for 95% of my work load with an SSD. It is only lacking in playing High Def Video, but UVD 3 solve that problem easily.

    How much would these thing cost? 70mm2 only sounds ridiculously cheap to make with only 480 pins on 40nm2.
    Reply
  • mino - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    CPU will be a bit faster (think dual 1,5GHz Pentium M)
    GPU will be 1/2 the speed or less - you have a relatively powerful GPU in there.
    Reply
  • nafhan - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    I think the GPU would actually be pretty close.
    Comparing the 530v (which should be pretty close to Bobcat performance: 80 shaders @ 470, 64bit mem bus) and the mobile x1600, the 530v comes out on top by a small margin according to notebook check:
    http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-H...
    http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-X...

    Ontario, on the other hand, should be about half since the GPU speed is around half.
    Reply
  • iwodo - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Relatively powerful GPU sounds not very good. If i consider 1 being first gen, 6 would be 6th gen already. Even though some of these are half gen, I would be very sad if a 5 years later Low end GPU cant outplaform my Mid Range from Gfx computer.. Reply
  • Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    X1600M looks like a slightly faster nvidia ION. Zacate is definately faster than that. According to the numbers from the preview from 6 weeks ago, it will be about 30% faster.

    The question is, how close will Ontario be to beating the performance of your X1600M laptop? I bet they will be so close you wont be able to tell the difference.
    Reply
  • plonk420 - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    i can't wait to put this in my HTPC!

    i just hope it can keep up with AnyDVD HD and realtime BD+ decryption...
    Reply
  • Setsunayaki - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    True freedom isn't about the actual processor. Its about the performance.

    If you run windows even under a low performance setting, the system is hurt by the fact one needs to run antiviruses, firewalls, spyware and adware removal tools. It means running Windows with a pair of bobcats + the GPUs are going to have their power spent on keeping those "Security" programs up.

    AMD itself can not code a decent Linux Driver to the point performance is going to be shot to hell on Linux.

    I'd much rather have a laptop with an nvidia solution running a linux system as it means I get performance since decent nvidia drivers exist on linux, and one doesn't have to run any of the security programs one has to run on Linux and the performance efficiency is a lot higher on Linux.

    All what fusion is going to do is increase the level of dependency people have to windows.
    Reply
  • jabber - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    All you need is MS Security Essentials and maybe Malwarebytes sitting there dormant as a backup.

    Dont need anything more.

    Shouldnt make any PC sweat.
    Reply
  • blowfish - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    That's got to be a joke! Have you ever noticed how MSSE can put a system into a pregnant pause every now and then? Watch the service in Task Manager, for example. On a low powered system, those pauses could be very long, and quite disruptive. Reply
  • MFK - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    I have what I would consider a low powered PC.

    An AMD 3200+ Athlon 64 Single Core.
    1 GB of ram and a Nvidia 7200SE.

    I have only MSSE and Zone Alarm installed on Windows 7 for almost a year now.
    I have yet to have a problem with virus/spam/pop ups.

    Point being: I have not noticed these pregnant pauses you speak of.
    :S
    Reply
  • jabber - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    I havent seen them. Running it on around 8 of my own PCs (singles to quads). I think I would have seen that by now.

    Maybe you have something wrong with your PC?
    Reply
  • Prosthetic Head - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    AMD/ATI Linux support has actually got a whole lot better in the last year or 2.

    I've got a 4870 (closed catalyst driver) in my desktop which only ever runs Ubuntu, and an x300 (open 'radeon' driver) in my laptop. They are running well w.r.t both speed and stability.

    AMD are also providing specs and some dev time to the open drivers so there is now varying levels of 2D and 3D acceleration working well in the open drivers - which is more than you can say for nVidia.

    I have also found that AMD vs Intel performance results are different under linux vs windows (much windows software is compiled using intels ICC and with more optimisation effort for intel processors). AMD generally perform relativity better under Linux (GCC compiler).
    Reply
  • Marburg U - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Large versions of this article's images are unavailable. Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Fixed :)

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • hvakrg - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Is there any news on wether or not these Atom competitios will be able to bitstream audio? Reply
  • jabber - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    ....had to play on looks a little more complete than the spaghetti fest you chaps got. Reply
  • ET - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    I was hoping that Ontario will bring a significant performance jump over dual core Atom + Ion 2. While there's still a chance it will be faster, I don't think it will be by much.

    I guess I will have to continue to wait (maybe forever) for a low end platform that would be good for basic gaming. I would happily give up DX11 to get twice as many DX9 cores.
    Reply
  • Aone - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    What will we see if we pair mobile Athlon with mobile discrete Radeon 54xx?
    Will Brazos have the same perf, better or worse?
    Reply
  • Lolimaster - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Fusion Ontario/Zacate has the same performance of current Athlon II / Turion II Neo (same performance as regular (Athlon II).

    Zacate GPU has lower clocks than of HD5400(500Mhz vs 650Mhz). That's the main difference.

    Why people mention CULV when Athlon II / Turion II are there and destroy those options as a cpu/gpu combo(equal cpu perf. way way better gpu perf.)

    80SP AMD GPU already surpass ION2 GPU.

    ET
    What dissapointing? Look any comparison of the current 45nm Neo's, it's a slaughter for the poor Atoms, you'll see the same slaughter with Brazos but with improved battery life and the better gpu(twice the HD4250)
    Reply
  • Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    If that thing really uses 4.7W its game over for AMD. No way should that part consume more than a watt. It should not even be there at all. Cant netbook manufacturers skip it entirely, and just go with a low power usb chip instead? What else do you need the FCH for on a netbook or a tablet? Reply
  • llllllllll - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Eh, the range was 2.7-4.7W TDP, which doesn't imply average power, just max for designing the enclosure.

    Also, considering 3W is typical for a DIMM of memory, and this thing is driving up multiple SATA, PCI-E, & USB ports (which remember, you have to be able to charge devices over USB), doesn't seem unreasonable that under load it would draw that much power.
    Reply
  • Zstream - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    How did you come to this conclusion?

    "Zacate takes the top two SKUs, while Ontario makes up the bottom two. The difference in TDP is entirely based on the clock speed of the CPU and GPU. And here is my concern. While a pair of Bobcats running at 1.6GHz are just awesome, drop the clock to 1.0GHz and I start getting concerned about performance. AMD didn’t let us test the C-50 but I’m curious to see what the margin of victory will be over Atom at that speed."

    If you believe it is 100% on clock speed, we have a ton of leakage.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Doubling the maximum GPU speed and increasing CPU speed 60%, plus added voltage to get it to run properly, could easily result in a doubling of maximum power use. Reply
  • Guspaz - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    These are still not really hybrid processors. They've taken a GPU and a CPU (well, two of 'em) and stuck them on the same die. There's no sharing of resources between the two.

    A true hybrid chip would, in my opinion, share most of the hardware between the CPU and GPU. They'd share execution resources. For example, in these AMD chips, the CPU's SIMD instructions can't take advantage of the GPU's SIMD blocks, from what I'm seeing (forgive me if I'm misreading this all).
    Reply
  • Fleeb - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Have you seen AMD's roadmap for this? It can answer your question. Reply
  • TemplarGR - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    This hardware is amazing, and has many possible uses. The most obvious is in netbooks and ultraportables: It will simply destroy the competition. AMD is right, what this market segment needs right now is more gpu power, not cpu. If their use case involved higher cpu usage, they wouldn't get a netbook or ultraportable anyway.

    This will also enable great tablets-ipad clones. Ideally a zacate tablet running Linux (for me).

    I bought an Acer Aspire One more than 2 years ago, and i am frustrated by Intel policies. The GMA they paired original Atom netbooks with was garbage, consuming 5 times the power Atom consumed... And its performance sucks. Current Atoms still suck, although with more battery power, because Intel hates Atom since it has lower margins. They didn't really expect this kind of success, they didn't want to believe for most people cpu power is enough... They stopped advancing Atom so it is no wonder Netbook sales growth has reached negative numbers... But this tactic will become a boomerang for them...

    It is nice seeing AMD making the hardware market exciting again!
    Reply
  • Gigantopithecus - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Can't wait to see whatever numbers AMD lets you give us next week. Hopefully they'll be enough so I can decide whether to wait past the holiday season for Zacate or go with an N550 system now. Reply
  • rayson - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    the total power draw for a netbook based on the brazos platform amd e-series will be 22-24 watts. the cpu performance for a amd e series will be equal to a core i5 520m.
    i got proof look at the other amd slideshows and videos they have done they have even shown avp running on 720p medium setting bit choppy though
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    CPU performance equal to an i5 520m? Thanks for the laugh. No way that is the case. Reply
  • rayson - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    i am a intel fanboy but amd really will have me buying a netbook now Reply
  • fic2 - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    In the AMD Brazos Lineup table it lists:
    AMD E-350 2 1.6GHz
    AMD E-240 1 1.5GHz

    Seems like the clock speed of the E-350 and the E-240 are reversed unless the dual core does actually have a faster clock than the single.

    I don't know why your spam program thinks my comment is spam.
    Reply
  • kjanadtech - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Good article. I currently own a Intel SU4100 system (Gateway ec1430u). I am very interested in zacate platform vs. the intel SU processor platform. There are very few SU4100 + GPU platforms (read MAC Book Air and Zotac IONITX-O-E), so I hope your tests will include these systems as competitors.

    What is more interesting (to me) is AMD’s Universal Media Interface (UMI) and the Hudson FCH. A necessary upgrade for every ultra portable is a SSD. I hope we will see the SB800 chipset SATA6 performance. Also why isn't there any concern about the memory (CPU, GPU) bottleneck.

    Staying tuned for the article next week and I hope to see benchmarks of the sata controller, especially SSD benchmarks, TRIM support, and overall SB800 throughput performance (USB, ethernet, etc).
    Reply
  • miahshodan - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Yeah, I have a gateway 1803 with a su3500 (core 2 solo 1.4) and even with only one core, it is fairly fast, much faster than an Atom with only a 5.5 watt TDP. I am not sure what the TDP of the graphics on the 945 is. The 945 graphics are certainly nothing real impressive, but they will do 720p youtube and accelerated ie9 beta is pretty fast. I see the Su line as the best competitor for the bobcat, and would like to see them compared. Reply
  • miahshodan - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    I meant HD4500 graphics, not 945 Reply
  • asmoma - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    First gen CULV does have lower power consumption than brazos and about the same as 2. gen CULV.

    http://media.bestofmicro.com/amd-fusion-power,1-6-...
    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/toshibat235d_08...

    5,31(minutes/wh)*1,35 is 7(minutes/wh). But because only the cpu and chipset is taken into consideration, the actual minutes/wh is lower.

    This does not make the brazos platform a bad product(like the yukon and congo platform(rubbish!)), but it won't be a product for high end(high quality) products like macbooks and vaio z.
    Reply
  • asmoma - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    "5,31(minutes/wh)*1,35 is 7(minutes/wh). But because only the cpu and chipset is taken into consideration, the actual minutes/wh is lower"

    Maybe even lower than 2. gen culv
    Reply
  • jbhunt17 - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    What game is that on the screen? Looks cool. Reply
  • LeftSide - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Anand,
    Will these new amd processors support ECC ram? I want to build a new low power Windows Home Server, and want to use ECC ram. Atom is too slow and doesn't support it.
    Thanks!
    Reply
  • ProDigit - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Darn, Homer Simpson's APU would not like it to be compared to a computer chip!

    So what do we call it, APU (A-Poo, APU with the u from 'under' or the U from 'unanimous')?
    Reply
  • ProDigit - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    In all honesty, those cpu's + GPU's are good enough for (heavy powerdrawing) netbooks, not notebooks or laptops, and especially not desktops!

    They may be good for HTPC's or small servers, but I see no unit strong enough to replace a C2Duo laptop (or desktop). (especially not at the price).
    Reply
  • jabber - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    Again this setup isnt for enthusiasts.

    Its not designed with you in mind.

    Its designed for your mum and dad who are still hobbling along with their old P4 or Celeron machine they bought back in 2005.

    Its designed for the knock about family PC that gets used mainly for Ebay, Messenger and Facebook and may allow the 13 year old daughter to play the Sims.

    This will be plenty powerful enough for small low power boxes in the home.
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 09, 2010 - link

    Whether you know anyone who wants an iPad is irrelevant. Personal anecdotal observations are frankly irrelevant.

    It is a statistical fact that *since* the iPad went on sale, netbook sales have been declining harder. Acer in particular is suffering as its netbook sales over the last few months have been down BIG-TIME, and Acer is one of the big netbook OEMs.

    Millions of iPads have already been sold, and Apple continues to sell them at a very high rate.

    Yes Atom's lack of performance in some areas might have contributed. However it is ludicrous to completely deny the impact the iPad is having on netbook sales.
    Reply
  • bloodterfly - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    For someone who uses statistics as an argument, you seem highly ignorant of the fact correlation != causation.

    iPad goes up, net books go down doesn't prove anything.

    Any number of myriad factors could've caused netbooks to stop selling.
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    You're right, and as I said, the iPad is likely not the ONLY cause.

    However, the fact remains that netbook sales are collapsing and I don't see them improving.
    Reply
  • mino - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link

    "Netbook" sales are collapsing for 2 reasons:
    1) crappy performance
    2) stupid Intel restrictions
    Both of which are to be remedied by Ontario ...
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    Funny you mention that, as AMD is in a similar situation. Bobcat is too power-hungry to compete with ARM, but it doesn't have enough performance to direct compete with Celerons, Pentiums, and i3s. Bobcat will have more CPU performance than Atom it seems, but to what end?

    AMD has Intel on one side and Apple on the other side. As I already said, netbooks are facing direct competition from the iPad. This is competition that BOTH Intel and AMD have to deal with. For laptops, i3 and i5 processors still reign supreme in terms of CPU performance, heat, and power efficiency. Sandy Bridge laptops will significantly improve GPU performance.

    Intel is trying to put most of its Atom focus to TVs, HTPCs, tablets, and phones. Of course they face competition from ARM and Apple.

    Atom may be too power-hungry at the moment, but future Atoms will further decrease the TDP to far below Bobcat levels.
    Reply
  • ze_troll - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    LAST TIME I CHECKED BRO I DUN THINK ANYTHING IS DIRECTLY COMPETING WITH CELERONS AND PENTIUMS BCUZ THEY R DED TEKNOLOGEES.

    HEY DARK_ARSCHONIS, THE YEAR 2000 CALLED, THEY WANT THEIR CPU BACK LOL
    Reply
  • Dark_Archonis - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    http://www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/cdetland.to?po...

    http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Toshiba+-+Satellite+La...

    Look, CELERON and PENTIUM processors for sale. Just because they still carry old names, does not mean they are dead technology. They are Core and Core 2-based CPUs simply renamed.

    Now go back under your bridge troll.
    Reply
  • Zoolookuk - Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - link

    Lots of comments here about this Vs Atom, but I think people are entirely missing the point about ultra-low power devices.

    First of all, what about ARM? The AMD/Intel rivalry is interesting if people still think that small devices will run Windows 7 Professional, or even OS X, but the reality is that OSes are changing. Android and most obviously iOS work differently, and I suspect that even OS X is moving much more towards GPGPU capabilities that make the CPU almost secondary.

    RISC and APU designs will be far more important in the next 5 years than they were in tghe last 15 years, and because of this, Intel probably has the biggest hill to climb. AMD understood this in 2006, which is why they bought ATI.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now