PDA

View Full Version : AMD has the Atom smasher


Heinz68
08-18-08, 09:12 AM
About time for another good news on AMD they sure can use it.

Tom'sHardware review compared the 8 watts AMD Athlon 64 2000 + vs Intel Atom. The Amd vs Intel chipset was also compared.

The Conclusion:
Athlon 64 Is More Economical, Faster, And Quieter

In our Munich lab's duel of the energy-savers, the AMD Athlon 64 2000+ beats the Intel Atom 230 in energy consumption and processing power. Each of the systems was based on a desktop platform. The Achilles heel of the Intel system is its old system platform with the 945GC chipset, while AMD offers a more modern 780G platform.

The energy-saving solution from AMD offers more possibilities: it has three times as many SATA ports, possesses better onboard graphics performance, and can also support two monitors. Unlike the Intel solution, an HD resolution (1920x1200) with high picture quality is possible through DVI/HDMI ports. And early information suggests that the AMD Athlon 64 2000+ should cost close to $90.

In terms of noise level, AMD can again beat the Intel solution: in our test the AMD energy-saving platform was able to run without a fan. Due to the high energy consumption of Intel?s chipset, the Atom board requires active cooling for stable and error-free operation.

Although the Athlon 64 2000+ uses more power than Intel?s Atom 230 CPU, the entire system requires less energy both when idle and during full load operation because of the chipset. AMD currently offers the most energy-saving desktop platform on the market, and requirements could be lowered even further if the manufacturer of a 780G board decided to use a single-phase controller with other energy-saving components.

The AMD platform has one disadvantage, however: at present, the 780G chip set is only available on a microATX board, where Intel offers a significantly smaller miniITX board. It would be sensible if AMD also offered very small embedded boards, which would enable the company to widen the gap even further.

The complete review LINK (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Atom-Athlon-Efficient,1997.html):

nekrosoft13
08-18-08, 09:30 AM
they should compare it to VIA Nano since it also beats the Atom

Heinz68
08-18-08, 09:46 AM
Next round :)
Plus VIA doesn't have the winning chipset.
So it's TKO :)

nekrosoft13
08-18-08, 09:51 AM
Nano could be quite a good chip if they match it with Tegra

kazna
08-18-08, 11:50 AM
So it's TKO :)

Hardly.

The AMD platform has one disadvantage, however: at present, the 780G chip set is only available on a microATX board

Atom is seeing its success in Netbooks and MIDs where AMD doesn't even have a motherboard designed for such devices. AMD doesn't have any presence in this market.

AMD may have a superior product on their hands, but its a moot point because it isn't available.

CaptNKILL
08-18-08, 11:54 AM
A 780G or 790GX Mini-ITX board would be freaking amazing...

mullet
08-18-08, 12:02 PM
A 780G or 790GX Mini-ITX board would be freaking amazing...

YOU CAN SAY THAT AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!

HTPC all the way. I can't imagine what AMD has in store for there new IGP.

CaptNKILL
08-18-08, 12:08 PM
Also, for what its worth you can get laptops and even tablet PCs that use the Radeon HD3200 GPU, which is the base for the 780G.

They may not call it "780G" but the (relatively) high performance integrated GPU is still there.

Here is an example...
http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/computer_can_series.do?aoid=35252&storeName=computer_store&category=notebooks&a1=Category&v1=Mobility&series_name=tx2500z_series

EDIT: I guess they still have nothing to compete with this though...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_Internet_Device

Heinz68
08-18-08, 02:51 PM
Tegra is a SoC right? No need to match it with something else ;)
Tegra is limited to small mobile devices. The ARM11, a 32-bit RISC processor is incompatible with x86 software. The Intel, VIA and AMD processors don't face such an issue and can run PC software without the need to recompile code.

Heinz68
08-18-08, 03:02 PM
Hardly.



Atom is seeing its success in Netbooks and MIDs where AMD doesn't even have a motherboard designed for such devices. AMD doesn't have any presence in this market.

AMD may have a superior product on their hands, but its a moot point because it isn't available.
First you forgot the review was about desktop use.
Second my TKO responds was to 'nekrosoft13' post:
they should compare it to VIA Nano since it also beats the Atom

The fact is they both are slower and on top suffer from not having as good chipset as 780G
Part of conclusion from VIA Nano and Intel review, you can read the complete review here (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/08/14/review_via_nano/page6.html).
both the Atom and the Nano desperately need better chipset support than the two systems that we've seen to date.
The second is that neither the Atom nor the Nano has enough performance to convince us of their appeal and we really, really want a dual-core version ASAP.

Way to go trying to turn positive review about the AMD CPU into negative. With your Intel promoting avatar (like Intel needs promoting) I'm really not surprised.

Heinz68
08-18-08, 03:18 PM
Sure but my point was that Tegra is a SoC, not a pure CPU or a pure Chipset.
Got it. I guess my reply should have been directed more towards 'nekrosoft13'.

nekrosoft13
08-18-08, 03:37 PM
Sure but my point was that Tegra is a SoC, not a pure CPU or a pure Chipset.

wasn't it mentioned somewhere that it was possible to use tegra onboard with via nano? maybe i didn't pay close enough attention when tegra or nano was announced

kazna
08-18-08, 09:31 PM
First you forgot the review was about desktop use.
Atom isn't designed as a desktop processor. One isn't better than the other as the two don't compete against each other.

Heinz68
08-19-08, 03:17 AM
Atom isn't designed as a desktop processor. One isn't better than the other as the two don't compete against each other.
I think you should take the rest of your argument to Intel and Tom'sHardware (why the review), or did you even bother to read the article. I'm not going to waste any more time on you.

The only Tom'sHardware mistake was I guess they didn't know there also is a Mini ITX board (http://www.hartware.de/press_8885.html) with AMD 780G chipset or maybe it was not available to them.

Here your Intel link to go argue any further.
Intel® Desktop Board D945GCLF with Integrated Intel® Atom™ Processor (http://www.intel.com/Products/Desktop/Motherboards/D945GCLF/D945GCLF-overview.htm)

Viral
08-19-08, 06:09 AM
Atom has potential as a low power solution, but not with the horrible pairing of the 945G chipset. Why even bother.

If AMD came up with an integrated solution, or at least an ITX board, they'd really have Intel beat in performance per watt. Pretty impressive for what is just and underclocked, undervolted last generation desktop processor. How much did Intel spend on R&D for Atom? AMD's K8 solution is flexible enough to just need a simple repackaging, that's gotta say a lot.

hell_of_doom227
08-19-08, 07:04 AM
AMD is two step behind Intel on CPU market. I don't see them making any money out of it in the future.

Heinz68
08-19-08, 08:16 AM
AMD is two step behind Intel on CPU market. I don't see them making any money out of it in the future.
That was not the point and sure this tread is not about it.
I already know it drives you crazy to see any good news about AMD/ATI doesn't matter how small or big it might be. Your posting history is the best prove about it.

mullet
08-19-08, 08:59 AM
Don't feed the troll.

AzraelDarkangel
08-19-08, 02:20 PM
The AMD platform has one disadvantage, however: at present, the 780G chip set is only available on a microATX board

There is a miniITX board:
http://www.jwele.com/motherboard_detail.php?419
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=32760&vpn=MINIX780G-SP128MB&manufacture=J%26W%20Technology
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1032874547

CaptNKILL
08-19-08, 10:25 PM
Why is cool stuff like that never available in the US?