POST A COMMENT

12 Comments

Back to Article

  • DanNeely - Thursday, August 18, 2011 - link

    If they're still going to be lagged badly in performance AMD's going to keep eating their lunch except at the very bottom of the market. Reply
  • mckirkus - Thursday, August 18, 2011 - link

    It's odd how far behind Intel is here considering their lead in high end chips. The fact that people are starting to realize an ok CPU with better than average graphics is the sweet spot doesn't bode well for Intel.

    The 22nm Atom will be a game changer though if they can get it out in a reasonable timeframe.
    Reply
  • name99 - Saturday, August 20, 2011 - link

    The problem is that Intel are being UNBELIEVABLY STUPID about this.
    They have an opportunity, in the Atom market, to redefine x86 forward. Ship Atom as a chip that does one set of things well --- it is a good x86-64 CPU, without all the accumulated crap x86 has picked up over the past thirty years. No PAE. No SMM. No 286. No x87. No MMX (use SSE). etc etc.

    This would
    (a) save some on CPU size
    (b) (Far more important) make design and validation vastly simply
    (c) Start laying the groundwork for improving the adult x86 line in the same way.

    Intel had a choice. They could ship a CPU that ran an irrelevant OS (any random version of Windows) unchanged, or they could compete with ARM, and require a recompile from MS. They made the stupid choice five years ago; but they don't have to stick with that stupid choice forever.
    Reply
  • OS - Friday, August 19, 2011 - link

    target/acer selling netbooks for ~$220 this week, most of the new batches are C60s now with 1.33 GHz turbo. Great feature list 11.6" 1366x768, 2GB, 250GB, 6 cell battery.

    i've never owned an atom based product but it seems like that line is getting really long in the tooth.
    plus it seems like most of the atom netbooks are feature thin esp for the price.
    Reply
  • yankeeDDL - Friday, August 19, 2011 - link

    I own both one of the earlier Atoms and an E-350 from AMD.
    I think that today, buying an Atom, makes as much sense ad buyin a Pentium4, when the Athlon came out (which means, none).
    Somehow back then many still bought Pentium4s, and I'm sure that many will keep buying Atoms, however, there's little doubt in my mind that if you know what you're doing, in this segment, you go for AMD.
    Of course there aren't that many people who know what they're doing, and I'm sure that Intel is counting on them to keep the money flowing, while they take their time fixing the architecture.
    Sure the power envelope is slightly difference, but the performance is night an day. But there's more: is not only that AMD CPUs are faster, they actually provide a very enjoyable experience, while with the Atoms, you feel like you're swimming in molassas.
    Reply
  • silverblue - Friday, August 19, 2011 - link

    I will also say that, unlike AMD's other CPUs, Bobcat designs are much stronger than the competition at single-threading, and the gap narrows when multi-threading is concerned and the Atom features hyperthreading. Even so, the E-350 is the superior chip. That said, the C-60 is interesting - a Bobcat CPU with turbo that results in a 33% clock speed boost.

    I'm looking forward to seeing what Enhanced Bobcat brings to the table (or tablet, even). Before then, though, we've got the E-450 coming with a small CPU speed boost, support for faster RAM, and a slightly stronger GPU (turbo?).
    Reply
  • heraldo25 - Saturday, August 20, 2011 - link

    The thing is that none of the AMD chips are running or will be running fanless in netbooks in the near future, while this generation of Atoms will. Intel is also pushing Meego for netbooks it seems, and I think that is a positive thing. Reply
  • Shadowmaster625 - Friday, August 19, 2011 - link

    I was at best buy last week, and what did I see? You guessed it, literally a dozen craptastic atom netbooks. There was seriously a whole row of em. I could not believe there was not one single brazos netbook or subnotebook. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Zip. Just atoms all lined up like little turds under a rail that birds perch on. Reply
  • icrf - Friday, August 19, 2011 - link

    My understanding is that there aren't good linux drivers with video decoding support for Brazos, so if you want something like an XBMC box, you may still be better off with Atom. Reply
  • adrien - Saturday, August 20, 2011 - link

    Friend of mine has an E-350 in a mini-itx board and while using the free drivers is a bit too slow for h264 1080p (not much, but a bit), using the proprietary fglrx driver makes the box fly with a CPU usage between 10 and 20%.

    And now, off to upgrade mesa to get even faster 3D on _my_ E-350. =)
    Reply
  • JonnyDough - Friday, August 19, 2011 - link

    Intel isn't very good at making GPUs OR drivers for them. :D Reply
  • JonnyDough - Friday, August 19, 2011 - link

    In addition I'd like to sneer a little at the giant...not that I'm an AMD fanboy that owns stock or anything (or do I?) but...

    Tick tock Intel. Tick tock. :) Where's Steve Ballmer been hiding? I almost miss laughing at, I mean...I almost miss him.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now