The Chipset err...Fusion Controller Hub

The Zacate/Ontario APUs have an integrated PCIe interface sporting 8 lanes. Four of those lanes are used for AMD’s Universal Media Interface (UMI) - a bus that links the APU to the Hudson FCH. The remaining four can be used for discrete graphics or a combination of discrete graphics and other PCIe controllers. Both PCIe interfaces can run at gen 1 or gen 2 transfer rates.

Display output naturally stems off of the APU. You can drive two displays in tandem over any combination of VGA or Display Port/DVI/HDMI/LVDS.

As I mentioned earlier, the APU sports a single channel memory controller - but you can install up to two DIMMs on that channel. Speeds are down from the 1333MHz system we tested at IDF, DDR3-1066 is the max you’ll officially see on a Brazos system.

The Hudson FCH supplies up to 14 USB 2.0 ports, 6 x 6Gbps SATA ports and another 4 PCIe lanes. The FCH is based on AMD’s SB800 series of South Bridges. Despite the small size, this is a full featured platform.

From the looks of it, AMD has all of the right ingredients for some very competitive entries in the mainstream and ultraportable notebook markets. Now it’s just up to the OEMs to build something cool out of it.

Check back in about a week for the full rundown on Zacate performance.

Meet the Brazos
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • creathir - Tuesday, November 9, 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...
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 9, 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.
  • cyrusfox - Tuesday, November 9, 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.
  • AnandThenMan - Tuesday, November 9, 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.
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 9, 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.
  • Jamahl - Tuesday, November 9, 2010 - link

    A good gpu from intel? How far into the future are we talking about here?
  • Dark_Archonis - Tuesday, November 9, 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.
  • Prosthetic Head - Tuesday, November 9, 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.
  • meksta - Tuesday, November 9, 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?
  • 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.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now