AMD Releases 12 New Chips at CeBIT
SuperDuG writes "AMD now offers three categories of processor for notebooks grouped under the Athlon XP-M brand. It labels them "desktop replacement," "standard," and the new "low-voltage". AMD plans to make a desktop replacement in the notebook computer market using the Barton Core, a technology designed to double the CPU Cache. Looks like yet another case of AMD being one-up on Intel."
half a year ago and prior to that id give AMD the advantage over Intel for their chips (except for the deceptivity of 2100+ chips being 1.73 Ghz).... even accepting their tendancy to overheat.
but lately Intel has been steadily ahead with clock cycles that even AMD's "2800+" marketing cant compete with.
luckily Intel has had a Looooooooonnnnnnnggggg track record of power hungry chips which i suppose allows AMD to give more muscle for less juice in laptops....
but to say this is "yet another case of AMD one upping intel" is a bit too much.
-- enter the sig --
--Idiots, Every single one of YOU, A flaming mass of conglomerated morons, hey wait a second, isnt that how RAID works?
Not to be too much of a pessimist but lets face it. The mobile market is dominated by Intel. I would love to buy an AMD based laptop when it comes time to replace my current trusty Dell 8100 but Who will make the laptops with these processors? Certainly not Dell, HP, IBM or the likes of any Tier 1 supplier that wants to keep on receiving their share of the Intel Processor Yields.
When I went looking to replace my old laptop a year & a half ago there was not a single tier 1 hardware maker that would dare put out an AMD based laptop in the market in fears that they might make mad the bear that Intel is.
Until the industry stands up to Intel in the same way that they need to stand up against M$ this will continue to be the case.
Simple enough to ask (This is a serious question) What if any current Tier 1 hardware manufacturer sells any Athlon based system for "Office" use? What about "Home" use. I dare say that the Home is the only one likely to have an answer. Are laptops devices mainly used in an "Office" or a "Home" environment? (Meaning you don't buy your kids a laptop to do their homework on, but you do have a laptop to "extend" your office to outside your place of work.).
Gato
First of all, thanks for the helpful links to AMD's and Intel's websites.
Second of all, Intel has been "one up" on AMD for quite some time now, being at least a couple of months ahead in terms of performance (3.06Ghz with HyperThreading is out now and available to buy). As always, it's great to see that AMD is hanging in there, but there's no need to toot their horn no matter how they're actually doing.
AMD needs to cement some deals with some major OEMs and fast. They released a mobile processor before, but I can't name anyone that sells athlon laptops. Hopefully somebody big like gateway or hp, etc. will pick these new chips up post haste. AMD is still lagging in the desktop world (Hammer where are you?) and they are bleeding cash like a sieve, hopefully, they can gain some footing here and give intel a run for their money.
Problem is, OS's are developed to desktop standards, not laptop ones. Granted, my 400mhz may run OSX nicely, It'd prolly crawl on an iBook of the equiv. Mind you, I understand the ramifications of a low power chip, but shouldn't the goal of a chip maker to make the coldest, fastest chip and the OS maker to make the fastest, smallest OS?
C'mmon people.. get on the ball here!
-
ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only
Twice the cache and half the size. OBVIOUSLY someone might have wanted to pay a little more attention.
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
Maybe because it's a lot cheaper to make a P4 and the high clock is a marketing tool?
AMD is deceptive for telling people their 1.7ghz chips perform at Intel 2.1ghz speeds? Wouldn't it be more deceptive to let people believe a 2.0ghz Intel chip out-performs an AMD 1.7ghz chip?
It's common courtesy for the proprietor not to piss in the fountain.
I remember reading that they did want to do that, but there was still the little problem of cost. The mobo gets more complex, etc etc.
Then there's the little matter of OS and App support. Windows 2000 handles dual processors pretty well, but it doesn't appear (I'm talking about image here, not substance) to work twice as fast. You need multithreaded apps etc etc etc to make good use of it.
Remember when I mentioned the rendering bit earlier? I could use a machine that's 16x faster than what I have now, but a 16 processor machine would be virtually worthless because of all the management that'd need to be done. I wouldn't get 16x performance out of it. I have 2 processors now and I'm barely getting 1.5x. The only real noticable benefit I'm getting from the extra processor is that my multithreaded apps are a bit faster and Windows (explorer etc) is much more responsive.
Yeah, I'd like dual to be the rule too. But the market doesn't want that. I agree that it's not impossible to do. I agree that it could be done. But there's a lot more to it than just releasing the hardware. The software end of it too can be problematic.
Considering what I know about chips and power, they probably really do munch a lot of energy, but if you were to ask me which parts I thought most drained a notebook computer of its valuable energy resource, I would have been more quick to suggest something like a backlit LCD display or things with moving parts such has the hard dissk and other peripheral devices.
Out of all laptop devices, is it the CPU that consumes the most? I would appreciate it if somebody could clear me up on this. :)
Did you happen to have a hard drive in this theoretical notebook? How about chipsets? Maybe a display as well? Guess what, the CPU power consumption is the least of your worries. The CPU doesn't eat enough power that slowing it down will extend the battery a significant ammount. You'd probably see better results just by dimming the backlight on your display a little more.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant