AMD Launches Low-Voltage Processors

mgoulding writes "CoolTechZone reports that AMD has released its low-power Athlon processors, which are designed to target the ultra-lightweight notebook market. The low-voltage chips will use smaller batteries and produce less heat. Acer plans to ship systems using the processors by the end of May." Acer plans to use them in their Ferrari line of thin laptops.

Comments

transmeta

[mandalayx]

The competitor that comes to my mind is Sharp and their Transmeta Efficeon processor. That notebook is quoted as being 2 pounds and 1GHZ/512MB/20GB/10.4" for $1499.

I do want a laptop for class and just having around, so I was strongly considering getting the Sharp, but constructive suggestions welcomed..

Re:transmeta

[Glock27]

The competitor that comes to my mind is Sharp and their Transmeta Efficeon processor. That notebook is quoted as being 2 pounds and 1GHZ/512MB/20GB/10.4" for $1499.

I don't think there's any comparison on performance...the 2800+ AMD part should completely smoke the Transmeta. Battery life...well I'm not sure but how long are you really planning on running unplugged at a time? I'd guess the AMD parts are intended to run for ~5 hours with moderate use.

Anyone have any benchmarks on the Efficeon?

Re:transmeta

[Mateito]

Don't touch the VAIOs either.

Stick will IBM, Toshiba and Dell.

Or, if you have money to burn, get a Tadpole. :)

Re:transmeta

[Anonymous Coward]

Transmeta Review

Re:transmeta

[Rodrin]

Well in terms of battery life the Efficeon blows the AMD away, however because of cache and optimization the AMD will blow a Transmeta processor away any day. The same goes for the fancy VIA processors that are "mobile". There is a difference between low power and mobile processors.

Re:transmeta

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a "old" laptop w/ a Transmeta processor and it scales very very well. Windows XP, DVD on fullscreen w/ smartbob, etc. No complains.

Re:transmeta

[Anonymous Coward]

If you are looking for a light weight notebook you should also check out the IBM X40 2.7lb, 12" screen, 1ghz ultra low voltage pentium m, 20gb HD, 256mb ram, integrated 802.11b in the lowest end model for $1500. Less if you use a Visa card, an employee discount or own IBM stock. Search fatwallet for the visa link.

Re:transmeta

[Bryan Ischo]

This advice is baseless.

I have a generic 5+ year old Kapok notebook that is still going strong. It turned out to be a much, much, MUCH better value than any IBM, Toshiba, or Dell.

I don't think that laptop manufacturers differ so much that you should evaluate them based on brand. Evaluate them based on model and features, not brand.

Oh, except for Sony. STAY AWAY FROM SONY!

Re:transmeta

[psiphre]

[complete agreement with parent]

VAIO notebooks are pretty, and powerful, but their batteries suck. a new laptop with the "complimentary" battery will get 45 minutes to an hour, and will deteriorate quite quickly to less than half an hour on full charge.

replacement batteries with a supposed 2 hour life run ~$180US last i was in the market.

[/complete agreement with parent]

Re:transmeta

[bhtooefr]

I guess it's time to buy a share of IBM, and grab a Visa card ;-)... BTW, I'd recommend it just on specs and brand reputation - that 1GHz P-M would probably put up a good fight against a 2GHz P4 (desktop or mobile), and blow that Transmeta away as much as, oh, the A64 blows the P4 away.

Re:transmeta

[evilviper]

I don't think that laptop manufacturers differ so much that you should evaluate them based on brand. Evaluate them based on model and features, not brand.

Not true at all... That is probably the single most important issue with notebooks.

Notebooks are not desktops. If a part is crap, you can't grab another and replace it... You have to go through the company. You better be buying from a company you REALLY trust, because notebooks are 100% lock-in.

Incidentally, I'm in the process of suing Sotec/Averatec...

Re:transmeta

[Dever]

Incidentally, I'm in the process of suing Sotec/Averatec...

why?

Re:transmeta

[basics]

I have a thinkpad with a 1.3ghz P-M chip. I have been very happy with the performance -- both speed of the system, and battery life. As far as performance goes, in a simple test we ran (quicksort in java with the same version on all three machines), my laptop fared well against by brother-in-laws 2.4GHz P4 desktop (although it was a little slower) but it blew away my Athlon 2200XP desktop. Admittedly this was not the most scientific test (all systems do have the same speed ram at least) but I was impressed.

Re:transmeta

[Dever]

i second that. sony has ass parts for customer service and ass parts defining policy on how to act like a business that cares about your, ahem...business.

if you want more than a cute looking laptop don't get a sony, don't bo a fool that falls for a silver-y laptop cuz it has a cool sony logo only.

if you ever expect to call them and have them care about your problems with the machine/delerious advice from sales people, you're much better off buying from a company that has a successful business unit. they actually have to keep shit logical, and try and keep peoples business. even if you're not buying enterprise sized order, i find companys like IBM know how to keep your business, and a company like sony know there'll be a sucker to take your place who wants a cool loking sony laptop to send email with.

oh, and for the record, their media integration isn't so tight-as-shit that it should sway you like it swayed me.

(shudder)

Re:transmeta

[evilviper]

That's quite a long story, but let me just summarize by saying that their components are crap, and their service is even worse... I mean beat-your-head-against-the-wall-for-months-on-end kind of bad service. The final straw was getting my notebook back with serious problems that it didn't have when I sent it in.

Re:transmeta

[mandalayx]

wow, interesting, thanks. makes me want to go out and grab an athlon.

The Transmeta efficeon is that company's last, best chance for survival. Moreover, it represents the acme of ideologically pure VLIW development. Featuring a laundry list of very real architectural advances beyond the Crusoe, efficeon raised the hopes of many that Transmeta had finally turned the corner on performance.

Unfortunately, the efficeon is a staggering failure by nearly every measure.

snip

We suspect that the reason efficeon throttles so horrendously is because Transmeta greatly desired to reduce its recommended Thermal Design Power so that it could secure fanless 1GHz designs. The problem is that as soon as you start needing that 1GHz that you paid for, the efficeon is throttling down to 933MHz, 800MHz or even lower.

In other words, the 1GHz fanless efficeon appears to be outright hucksterism.

Transmeta projects that the maximum clockspeed that the 0.13-micron efficeon will achieve is 1.2GHz and, beyond any length of reason, positions this chip against 1.7GHz Banias and 1.8GHz Dothan! Well you can't claim that Transmeta's marketing folks are short on outrageous audacity.

the size might be killer though, so not counting the sharp out on that factor. after all I do own an ipod :)

-parent

Re:transmeta

[WuphonsReach]

Notebooks are not desktops. If a part is crap, you can't grab another and replace it... You have to go through the company. You better be buying from a company you REALLY trust, because notebooks are 100% lock-in.

Worse, if a part fails in a notebook, it's usually when you're in a hotel room, hours away from the nearest company tech, and you're due to give a presentation in an hour.

Buying a cheap notebook makes sense only if your time is not billable or you have access to a spare machine within walking distance.

Watt?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm amped to get one of these!

the final frontier

[the arbiter]

I've been using nothing but AMD since 1998 and am an extremely satisfied customer.

If AMD has truly learned how to make a cool, low-voltage/low-wattage processor, well...all I can say is you might want to sell your Intel stock.

Go AMD!!!

Re:the final frontier

[tibike77]

Intel (as Microsoft and other "dinosaurs") will never get "really low in stockprice", because they have too much accumulated wealth to get out of most situations. Personally, I have used a mix of all kinds of MoBos and CPUs from everybody (yeah, even a Cyrix) and I can't say I have been extremely pleased nor displeased by any of them. The only news here is (therefore) that a new "cooler" (pun intended) CPU is here for the laptop market, hence prices will go down... shoppers rejoice :)

Re:the final frontier

[Rodrin]

Most geeks I talk to, unless they are crazy or otherwise weird, agree that AMD is the processor to go with. I can handle a little more heat when it comes to a $100 price difference most of the time. And now that technically the intel 64bit processors are a copy of AMD's Athlon64 perhaps AMD will lead and intel will walk behind. You never know.

Re:the final frontier

[Anonymous Coward]

Penis crap scoopula flakes,you get me my man

Uh, no.

Re:the final frontier

[geekoid]

well, IF AMD becomes the market leader, rest assure most geeks will switch to Intel.
These days, being a geek doesn't mean liking the best designed products, but you also have to like the underdog as well.

Re:the final frontier

[njcoder]

While lower voltage, cooler processors are great for laptops, it's the server market that could benefit most from these features. Paying $100 less for a processor is only one thing to consider when you have racks and racks of servers that you have to power and cool.

Re:the final frontier

[13Echo]

Not particularly. Geeks will normally just by the fastest CPU for the right price. For many years, that has been AMD. Intel is getting to be more competitive, but Athlons still perform better (in most respects) than a Pentium 4 of the same price.

There's a reason why AMD has slowly been gaining on Intel for market share, and that reason is why they accounted for 52% of desktop CPUs that shipped in a recent week. The "Intel Inside" campaign is wearing off, especially when Intel is trying to compete with AMD by releasing their own 64 bit CPUs that are based off of AMD's pioneering X86-64 chips. Who's doing the reverse engineering now?

Re:the final frontier

[Spoing]

1. well, IF AMD becomes the market leader, rest assure most geeks will switch to Intel.

   These days, being a geek doesn't mean liking the best designed products, but you also have to like the underdog as well.

Do you have a specific list to share (where popular is unfairly ragged on while obscure has an undeserved geek/wannabe-geek following)? Maybe I misunderstand.

For the record: I have bought an even split of AMD and Intel over the years. I don't see that changing, though it entirely depends on what goes around the processor. It's tough to pick a good sweet spot in laptops/notebooks mostly because of the extras (wanted and unwanted).

There are many gems out there that aren't popular so personally I get excited when I find them. Usually, they follow standards properly (in hardware and/or software). I also like booring and cheap generic basics too; mice, keyboards, hard drives, 100 or 100/1000 bit ethernet, USB 2 (not the dumbed down one), ... .

Re:the final frontier

[222]

Oddly enough the underdog also seems to have a better product at a lower price, and a much larger drive for innovation. Just my 2c ;)

Re:the final frontier

[rhuntley12]

Same here, AMD and Intel processors are both good. You won't notice a different on your AMD 2400+ and your P4 2400Mhz unless your really watching for it. The one thing you will notice is you're wallet. That's why I always use AMD for the last few years, excluding my laptop which is a Dell...

Re:the final frontier

[Rodrin]

Exactly my point. Geeks don't try to stand out from the croud. If Intel was 95% of the market share and was dirt cheap you bet your ass we would spend out chimp change with Intel. However this is NOT the case. I guess it kinda goes to say..what kinda geek are you if your an underdog only consumer?

Re:the final frontier

[evilviper]

I can handle a little more heat when it comes to a $100 price difference most of the time.

As a matter of fact, AMD processors have a lower maximum heat output than Intel processors. If you think Intel processors run cooler, you're probably falling for the "thermal rating" crap that Intel made up.

Yes, AMD64 processors are even better, but XP processors are nothing to scoff at.

Re:the final frontier

[Dever]

how many people at BestBuy do you think know that Intel copies AMD's x64 bit instructions? Hell, include salespeople there too while we're at it. 64 bit is just something that intel will have on the sticker (shitty that it's already on the cpu, but not) just like AMD will, for most everyone.

in addition, you know what? it won't even matter, because thanks to our mandated obsolescence cycle, in less than a year, all cpus will have 64 bit stickers, and it will be a non issue that it's there, or where it came from to Joe Consumer.

Re:the final frontier

[Visaris]

And now that technically the intel 64bit processors are a copy of AMD's Athlon64 perhaps AMD will lead and intel will walk behind.

I don't think that's true at all. The ISA was coppied by Intel, but the microarchitecture of AMD and Intel CPUs are very different. Intel didn't just rip off AMD's CPU.

...Go AMD!

Re:the final frontier

[Deliveranc3]

AMD put some power at my price point and so did ATi... when someone does that I appreciate it. Computers are a little more expensive then they should be, most people who have bought a lot of hardware feel this pinch.

When a company brings us a business model that offers performance/price metrics with a tinge of sanity how can we help but love them.

Now if AMD and Ati become the big players maybe they will monopoly price their processors too :(

Re:the final frontier

[zerocool^]

Dude.

1.) Yes, I hope that AMD stock does go up, it's slumped this week (I've lost 2.2% this week on AMD in my simulator.
2.) But, Intel is probably a good buy anyway. Tech stocks tend to follow each other more than compete. When one does will, it tends to bolster the entire industry.

Re:the final frontier

[Anonymous Coward]

you're wallet

"your".

Re:the final frontier

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally, I have used a mix of all kinds of MoBos and CPUs from everybody (yeah, even a Cyrix) and I can't say I have been extremely pleased nor displeased by any of them.

You haven't been extremely pleased nor displeased by any of them....

Dude, didn't you say you'd owned a Cyrix???

I hate my old 6x86 chip (even though, cheapass as I am, I have it sitting in an almost-empty case running as a shitty firewall). Its only decent feature was the power-down mode in Linux, which I had to use to save it from the insane overheating it and the crappy motherboard voltage regulators generated. Blue screens beyond belief, crashing stable Debian systems, it was a nightmare.

Re:the final frontier

[Anonymous Coward]

that AMD is the processor to go with. I can handle a little more heat when it comes to a $100 price difference most of the time.

Um... you haven't been paying attention (or you're new here!).

For the past 6 months to a year, *Intel* CPUs have been the hottest (temp) chips on the block.

I've seen the Intel Prescott called the Intel Prec*hot*.

Why is it called low-voltage?

[ForestGrump]

ok, it runs on a lower voltage.
But isn't the reality that they have a lower wattage?
Wattage being what really matters when it comes to power consumption and heat displacemnet.

-Grump

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the lower voltage allows for smaller batteries (or longer life) because a more effecient power supply is possible with lower voltages.

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Let's analyze and translate the above post shall we:

ok, it runs on a lower voltage.

That much is said in the article.

But isn't the reality that they have a lower wattage?

"wattage", also called power, only has to do with voltage for a fixed resistance. I suppose AMD lowered the voltage to lower the power consumption too, though, so what you said is obvious.

Wattage being what really matters when it comes to power consumption and heat displacemnet.

Yes, power is indeed what matters when it comes to power consumption.

In short: what a stupid post that was...

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[Humorously_Inept]

Voltage is a squared term in the general power function for a CPU. Lowering the voltage will have a significant effect on power consumption. As you might imagine, the chip's operating frequency is another term in the function.

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[Anonymous Coward]

Successfully modded "+5, karmawhore" too

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[Darth McBride]

IANAEE, but Ohm's law would suggest that a reduction in voltage would pull less current assuming the resistance is constant(V=IR). Power is equal to current times voltage (W=IV). Lower voltage leads to lower current which leads to lower power.

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[ImpTech]

Well, power and voltage are directly related, so yeah, a reduction in voltage causes a reduction in power used. Whats your point?

Now, you could theoretically make a high-voltage chip that is still low power. But thats not what they did. They lowered the voltage that the chip needs to be supplied. If anything, calling it a low-power chip makes less sense.

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[Annirak]

It's called "low voltage" because the term was coined by an engineer.

What they really intend is "low power" and one means by which to achieve that is by running at a lower core voltage. Someone who knew that then called the device a "low voltage" processor

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's called "low voltage" because the term was coined by an engineer.

And it beat out the marketing department's entry "Less shocky stuff".

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[pranay]

Actually, its the current that matters the most. Laptop batteries, or for that matter all batteries, are rated in terms of their capacity, which is the amount of charge stored in them. This is expressed in terms of Amp-hours. A 2.1 A-hr battery will last for an hour if it delivers 2.1 amps continuosly. So actually the current drawn out of a fixed voltage battery would depend on the load. The load is variable in a system like a laptop, where different subsystems (DVD player, hard drive, fans, speakers) turn on and off occassionally. The best way to decrease the power consumption of a device would be to use components which consume low current, or to design the system cleverly such that their duty cycles (ON times) are shorter with less overlaps. Modern laptop batteries have significantly higher capacities coupled with excellent mass and volume densities. It amuses me a lot that most advancements in battery technology come from commercial non-critical applications like laptops while automobile and aerospace industries seem to need it the most. But I guess its the same with all kind of tech-products. Nice to see us consumers helping advance science and technology.

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[gerardrj]

Everyone, please take a step away from the keyboard and visit this site:

http://www.nmsea.org/Curriculum/Primer/How_is_el ec trical_energy_measured.htm

It's a very nice, plain english, tutorial about the relationship between Volts, Amps, Watts and Joules (the electric pantheon so to speak).

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[sumdumass]

I don't think that is a stupid question at all. You are asuming that AMD is lowering the voltage to save on power. In reality you can lower the voltage and increase the amperage and still use the same amount of power/whattage.

What the parent was doing is asking if that was what they ment in the article. If this was meaning the overal power consumption was lowered or if it was just shuffled around.

--the only stupid question is the one not asked

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[evilviper]

"wattage", also called power, only has to do with voltage for a fixed resistance.

No, wattage has to do with voltage times amperage. Resistance doesn't really eneter into it.

I suppose AMD lowered the voltage to lower the power consumption too

It's not good to guess. AMD could have lowered the voltage while increasing the wattage.

In fact, it's basic electronics that, when lowering voltage, you have to increase amperage to maintain the same performance. Since amperage is what is consumed, just decreasing the voltage would be a step in exactly the wrong direction.

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[Kjella]

"wattage", also called power, only has to do with voltage for a fixed resistance.

No, wattage has to do with voltage times amperage. Resistance doesn't really eneter into it.

You forget Ohm's law: I=U/R, and so P = IU = U^2/R. So assuming you have a fixed R, wattage only depends on voltage.

In fact, it's basic electronics that, when lowering voltage, you have to increase amperage to maintain the same performance.

Unless you have the ability to change R, that is impossible. In itself less voltage = less power and less performance.

Lower power consumption means you can have higher transistor density though, which is what gives higher performance. I don't know what electronics class you went to, but I'd get my money back...

Kjella

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[corngrower]

operating frequency is another term in the function

Power is pretty much directly proportional to frequencty (for a given processor and voltage).

Power is really what you want to know when dealing with battery powered equipment. This pretty much determines battery life. Another thing that I'ld like to know when shopping for notebooks is the capacity of the battery, in Amp-Hours or milliamp-hours.

Re:Why is it called low-voltage?

[corngrower]

Actually I believe that the nickel-metal hydride (n-mh) batteries that are used in laptops had their origins in research done for electric vehicles. I know that they were using this type of battery in electric vehicls in the mid 80's. Their use in laptops and cell phones came aftewards.

tech info

[Coneasfast]

here is some tech info in case it gets /.ed

The other models - 2800+, 3000+, and 3200+ are rated to operate at 65W while the 2700+ is rated to operate at 35W. The Pentium M processor models - 1.5Ghz, 1.6Ghz, and 1.7Ghz are set to operate at 24.5W. The AMD 2700+ budget Mobile processor still consumes more power than the Centrino platform, which uses Intel's Pentium M chips. Another big difference between the rest of Athlon64 Mobile processors from AMD and the 2700+ budget level Mobile processor is the amount of L2 cache. The 2700+ processor has 512KB cache while the rest of the models house 1MB cache. The 2700+ is clocked at 1.6Ghz; the same clock speed as the 2800+, which has 1MB L2 cache.

Re:tech info

[Naffer]

The big problem that I see is that the CPU isn't responsible for all of the laptop's power consumption. The hard drive, GPU, chipset, RAM, and screen all use a ton of power too.
That said, the one thing that Intel really did right was that Pentium-M processor. I desperatly tried to convince my friend to get one, but instead he bought an Alienware with a 3.06Ghz desktop chip. (No speed throttling ability whatsoever) The result? 55 minutes of battery life on a single batter, just shy of two hours with the extra battery. Thats if you're just surfing the net.

Re:tech info

[Sawbones]

On a tangent - mod offtopic if you wish - I've been specing out a nice quiet system to replace my athelon and one of my concerns has been processor power consumption (it takes a big fan and or heat sink to dissipate 65 watts). Where did you get your stats on processor power consumption? Better yet, any place that lists something similar for video cards and/or harddrives (the other two biggest heat sources)?

The only general data I've found has been fairly out of date and anecdotal.

Cheers,
- Sawbones

Re:tech info

[number]

What you want are the Processor Electrical Specifications for any and all CPUs you can think of.

If you're serious about quiet (or preferably, silent) computing, the most valuable site I know of is Silent PC Review.

Re:tech info

[Sawbones]

Man that first link is comprehensive. and at 103W for the high end P4s, I think I'll be aiming more midrange. thanks for the links.

I also came across endpcnoise.com, they were one of the few places I could find the nexus silentx power supplies - just in case anyone else is looking.

Cheers,
- Sawbones

Re:tech info

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Which is kind of curious that Pentium M have 1 MB (first gen) and 2 MB (next gen) L2s and still are lower power than AMD's chips yet perform about as well.

I'd like to see AMD to be a credible force in mobile computing, but in the past, inefficient chips and IMO substandard mobile chipsets have hampered them, I don't see that improving just yet.

Re:tech info

[addaon]

The greatest power users in most laptops are, in decreasing order, cpu, screen, 802.11, gpu, hard drive, and other crap. Under normal usage, of course.

Re:tech info

[Brian Stretch]

What you have to remember is that the Athlon 64 series has very good power management, far better than Intel SpeedStep. When you're not doing anything stressful (say, reading Slashdot), the CPU slows and the core voltage drops down. The desktop Athlon 64's drop to 800MHz, my notebook says it's at 318MHz right now. If you need processing power that'll stomp a Pentium-M, it'll do that too. Oh, and you can run 64-bit Linux. And have the NX bit for neutralizing buffer overrun attacks in Windows XP SP2.

The heat output of my HP zv5000z Athlon 64 3200+ notebook with the CPU maxed out is fairly impressive but I've yet to be able to get it to overheat. (The Compaq r3000z is equivalent.) You can get 1920x1200 res screens for them now too. Pity HP used Linux-hostile Broadcom wireless cards and rigged their BIOS to explicitly reject non-HP wireless miniPCI cards (dumb!), but what can y'do (IBM and Dell do too, eMachines doesn't).

Anyhow, if I could get a mid-to-lightweight notebook with a low-voltage Athlon 64 2700+, top-of-the-line screen, Atheros WiFi (very Linux friendly), and GeForce 5700 Mobile, I'd probably upgrade again. The zv5000z's GeForce 440 is fine for getting work done and strategy games but woefully inadequate for UT2004. (Are you listening HP?)

Re:tech info

[Anonymous Coward]

just to point out, those numbers are the thermal design powers, which is the maximum power consumption of the chips...(important for designing heat sinks)

But in actual use, most chips use much less than that- a pentium 4 is only 2-3 watts, and a pentium m is under half a watt when just browsing the internet....

The average power consumption is way more important for most users, unless you plan to play games on the road with 100% CPU utilization all of the time...

Re:tech info

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

"gpu"

Today's mobile GPUs (not the Intel Integrated garbage) can draw just as much wattage as the CPU (a Pentium-M and a Mobility Radeon 9600 are about the same).

Now, as long as you don't play games, the GPU won't draw much current. However, if you're just surfing the web or typing, the CPU isn't drawing much either. In this situation, the screen would likely become the largest power draw.

Re:tech info

[addaon]

Yep. GPU, hard drive, and especially cd can all spike to be the biggest power user, sometimes for quite a while... "Normal" usage is browsing the web, office stuff, and so on, I assumed.

Re:tech info

[Anonymous Coward]

Intel's 24.5W TDP is not the same as AMD's 35W TDP (in 30430.pdf). Applying the same methods of AMD's TDP to Pentium M, has the 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7GHz using 34.2W (using the datasheet 25261203.pdf). And the MA64 2700+ and 2800+ have a DRAM controller not in Pentium M. Given that, Pentium M actually uses more power when you include that portion of the NB.

Just compare things using the same standards equally to both.

Re:tech info

[dago]

Don't forget, AMD is rating the thermal power at maximum power drain, while Intel is rating them at typical usage, not maximum. So, it would be AMD_max = 35W vs Intel_avg = 25 W, and performance levels unknown.

And a nice thing about mobile amd cpu is that they are compatible with desktop boards, where intel are not in practice (400$ boards don't count).

Re:tech info

[Luminous Coward]

The other models - 2800+, 3000+, and 3200+ are rated to operate at 65W while the 2700+ is rated to operate at 35W.

The desktop replacement (DTR) processors (3000, 3200, 3400) dissipate 81.5 W at full speed (TDP in Max P-State, 52.9 A @ 1.5 V). The mobile processors (2800, 3000, 3200) dissipate 62 W at full speed (also TDP in Max P-State, 42.7 A @ 1.4 V).

AMD Athlon 64 Processor Power and Thermal Data Sheet

Where did you find the data sheet for the new low power cores? I couldn't locate it.

Re:tech info

[vanillacoke]

You do know how much video ram is need to store those 16:9 screen sizes, right?

Re:tech info

[Coneasfast]

Where did you find the data sheet for the new low power cores? I couldn't locate it.

go to the article, there is a link on the bottom of the article (last paragraph), click that and it will take you to another page.

Re:tech info

[Anonymous Coward]

And a nice thing about mobile amd cpu is that they are compatible with desktop boards, where intel are not in practice (400$ boards don't count).

If true, they'll probably sell tons of these chips into the quiet / small form factor market. Low-power and low-heat make it much easier to cool those systems.

Big Mistake, AMD...

[Deraj DeZine]

They should have gone the other way, making fast, but hot processors, and then marketed their notebook/travel iron combos.

No, I don't iron my clothes either, but it's the thought that counts, right?

Re:Big Mistake, AMD...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for proving my theory that any attempt at a joke that gets posted early will be modded up.

Re:Big Mistake, AMD...

[Anonymous Coward]

I must say, you're right, the guy wasn't very funny at all...

Less heat?

[rms_nz]

If laptops start producing less heat, then what are we going to use for leg warmers on those cold winterery days?

Re:Less heat?

[dicepackage]

be careful there are 65,100 hits on Google about people burning their penis http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe =UTF-8&q=%27laptop+penis%22&btnG=Search

Re:Less heat?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and one of the first links goes to gay.uk ... I'm just curious, were these people actually trying to burn their penis?

Re:Less heat?

[Tumbleweed]

Get a cat. To be really geeky about it, you should name it either 'Five' or 'Script'.

Re:Less heat?

[Anonymous Coward]

Get a cat. To be really geeky about it, you should name it either 'Five' or 'Script'.

My dog's name is Foobee (Foobar didn't work for a female dog). Is that geeky enough for you?

Re:Less heat?

[Tumbleweed]

Geeks don't have dogs, so no, not geeky enough. Dogs are for people who enjoy country music, sporting events, and going outside. :)

Re:Less heat?

[Anonymous Coward]

A PPC chip?

I bet these OC nicely

[Anonymous Coward]

Generally, the less heat there is, the more room you have to try OC'ing. The current line of Mobile AMD processors has done very well.

Re:I bet these OC nicely

[TheBurningDog]

but are they pin compatible with the desktop line?

Re:I bet these OC nicely

[INeededALogin]

Overclocking is just a bit over-rated.

What does over-clocking gain you? CPU Errors(instability), extra-heat, voided warranty, and possibly a dead CPU. Yes, you can come up with ingenious ways to keep that chip cool, but is the result really worth it especially when the extra speed you gain will be available in a non-overclocked model next month?

Re:I bet these OC nicely

[Anonymous Coward]

When I bought my AMD Athlon XP 2500 Barton, the 3200's cost about 3 times as much. You know how much work I had to do to overclock it? I changed the memory speed from 166 to 200, and voila. No instability, still runs relatively cool, and if it dies and I need to replace it, I'll still have saved money.

Re:I bet these OC nicely

[Carnildo]

Only if you do it wrong. If you know how to overclock, it gains you:

1) Serious savings. A low-speed CPU in a group can usually be overclocked to match the speed of the top CPU in that group without any special measures
2) Extra speed. You can almost always clock a CPU 5%-10% beyond the top speed for a processor group. If you're lucky, or using extreme cooling, you can get 20% or more.

And sometimes the extra speed isn't available for a while. When I purchased my current computer, the XP2100+ (266FSB) was the fastest CPU around. I got an XP2000+ (266FSB) and overclocked it to be an XP2200+ (333FSB), a chip that didn't show up until nine months later.

Re:I bet these OC nicely

[Humorously_Inept]

Actually, because of the way CPUs are binned to meet market demand, overclocking a CPU isn't necessarily doing anything to it that's bad. All CPUs are tested after fabrication and sold according to their capabilities. In the event that demand for a lower end processor is high, a processor that tests well can be marked as and sold as a lower-end model. It's still the same processor it was when it was tested, though. In this case, you might drop a CPU into your computer and experience exceptional overclocking potential. I have an XP1600+ that overclocks to 2200+ at default voltage and works ideally under a torturous FAH load. In fact, you could view the chip as being underclocked at the factory instead of overclocked by the user! :) Cooling is an important factor, but its nowhere near as important as good luck (or picking a good stepping).

Re:I bet these OC nicely

[Fweeky]

Same here, Barton 2500+ running at 3200+; a real 3200+ would cost at least twice as much for the 20% or so performance boost you get out of it. I have no significant issues with heat, and stability is top-notch. Worth it for me :)

Re:I bet these OC nicely

[WuphonsReach]

I have an XP1600+ that overclocks to 2200+ at default voltage and works ideally under a torturous FAH load. In fact, you could view the chip as being underclocked at the factory instead of overclocked by the user!

Now that's a reasonable approach to O/C, taking advantage of a chance occurence where the chip was capable of more without spending extra cash on cooling.

My objection to O/C is where it's done solely for the bragging-rights, or people that spend way more cash then makes sense to gain a measly 5% gain.

BTW, another good O/C testing program is Prime95. It's proven to be so reliable as a stress test over the years, that they've even added a mode where it functions solely as a stress test.

Uber laptop

[DigiShaman]

So when will the Sony VAIO PCG-X500 series get one of these. Those carbon fiber laptops are badass!!! ...must..have..the..precious!!!

http://www.icube.us/sony_x505/product_overview.h tm

Re:Uber laptop

[Glock27]

Those carbon fiber laptops are badass!!!

Hrm, if I was going to spend $4000(!) on a laptop, I think I'd get a 17" Powerbook (Radeon 9700, yum!) along with some accessories and RAM expansion.

YMMV. :-)

Re:Uber laptop

[Anonymous Coward]

If I was going to spend $4000, I'd pay off my credit cards or my car.

Re:Uber laptop

[Naffer]

It's really disapointing that the Mobile Radeon 9700 doesn't use the same core as its 8 pipeline desktop brother. The mobile one is actually just a slightly higher clocked 9600. (4 pixel pipelines.)

Re:Uber laptop

[Anonymous Coward]

If I had $4000 to blow I'd go with an IBM T41p. Might not lok as nice but not many notebooks come with a ATI FireGL T2 128mb video card, 6 hour battery and still weigh only 5lbs. Plus its only $3200 so you could upgrade to 2 gigs of ram.

Article Text

[CowboyShit]

Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) finally launched its low-powered mobile Athlon processors today, as expected earlier. CoolTechZone caught a leaked document on AMD's website few weeks ago, which outlined the new mobile Athlon64 processors. The Athlon64 2700+ and the 2800+ will target the ultra-portable and the ultra-thin notebook segments of the mobile market. These new chips will also not support 64-bit computing architecture from AMD as reported earlier. The notebooks featuring these chips will use smaller batteries and produce less heat due to low voltage being used by the newly announced chips. Acer will be the first notebook maker to adopt these chips in it's Ferrari line notebooks. Ferrari models from Acer are expected to ship with the Althon 2700+ and the 2800+ chips by the end of this month. Amoi, a chinese laptop maker, will also start incorporating the new processors by the Q3 or Q4 of the current year. The processors are now available at the prices of $209 and $241 per thousand units.

They had to go and ruin it didn't they

[Wasteofspace]

Now what am I supposed to cook my eggs on????

Re:They had to go and ruin it didn't they

[Loki_1929]

"Now what am I supposed to cook my eggs on????"

Might I suggest this?

Re:They had to go and ruin it didn't they

[LoocSiMit]

Now what am I supposed to cook my eggs on????

Laptops cook my sperm.

Are you a girl then? Do you fancy a shag?

Ferrari laptops?

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess AMD chips make a better "Vroom!" noise...

Low Voltage Battery + Smaller battery = ?

[SCSi]

So this means that laptops will still have the same low battery life as they do now. Why dont they make low voltage processors with larger batteries so you can get more than a few hours of runtime.

Re:Low Voltage Battery + Smaller battery = ?

[Have Blue]

Strongly seconded... It's not like laptops themselves can get much smaller and still have usable screens and keyboards, so they may as well fill the remaining space with battery. I'd be much happier with a laptop that ran an hour longer than one that was a half-pound lighter.

Re:Low Voltage Battery + Smaller battery = ?

[Brandybuck]

Amen!

1998 == fat 3 hour battery
2001 == medium 3 hour battery
2004 == thin 3 hour battery

Have we become so sedentary that the weight of last year's laptop is going to cause heart attacks and strokes?

Re:Low Voltage Battery + Smaller battery = ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not a matter of weight - it's a matter of where the weight is carried. Picture a bunch of geeks wandering lopsidedly around an airport due to the weight of a laptop bag on one side... :)

Seriously though, the lighter the better as far as I'm concerned. Having a laptop bag hanging off the shoulder can get pretty uncomfortable quickly...

Re:Low Voltage Battery + Smaller battery = ?

[rhuntley12]

Protecting themselves from lawsuits? That battery hurt my back! Or I guess you could look at how hot some of these get, I'm surprised no lawsuit has stemmed from that. My Inspiron 5100 gets pretty damn hot after a couple hours.

Re:Low Voltage Battery + Smaller battery = ?

[mandalayx]

So this means that laptops will still have the same low battery life as they do now. Why dont they make low voltage processors with larger batteries so you can get more than a few hours of runtime.

Theoretically, so it weighs less. I am considering buying the Sharp 2.0 lb notebook based upon its light weight...so seeing an AMD with low weight is encouraging because I know AMD has done well with performance in the past.

Laptops...

[Rodrin]

Perhaps soon AMD will lead the laptop market rather than Intel. Lately AMD has been gaining a huge market share and will soon be getting a little too close for comfort for Intel. What do I have to say about that? The more the merrier, AMD is wonderful, plain and simple.

Re:Laptops...

[servognome]

Yes if you consider less than 1% gain in overall PCs to 14.9%, loss of 3.2% in laptops to 8.4%, and gain of 1.7% to 4.8% of servers huge gains

Re:Laptops...

[jrockway]

Stastically, AMD isn't doing anything new really. However, in terms of mindshare, they're doing quite well. Remember the X86-64 spec? Intel seems to have copied AMD. This shows that AMD is ahead in something.

Frankly, whoever gives me a 5GHz 64-bit processor for $100 first wins in my mind :-D

Re:Laptops...

[Ahkorishaan]

Why does the mhz myth still exist? Intel will get there first I assure you. Who will be the better performer at the time? That is another question entirely.

Re:Laptops...

[servognome]

Why does the mhz myth still exist?
Because both AMD & Intel spent millions during the 200MHz-1.2Ghz years telling people clockspeed was everything. Its hard to deprogram people.

Re:Laptops...

[tommyboyprime]

I'm an old geek, not a AMD fanboy, and have used AMD processers since they first were available. Why? Because they were reliable and always, at least to me, provided the most bang for the buck. I also wanted something not everybody else had. I liked AMD over Intel because it just seemed to me they were an honest outfit-giving the consumer what he wanted at an honest price without the hype of Intels advertising. When was the last time you saw an AMD commercial on TV?

Re:Laptops...

[Ahkorishaan]

That sir, is the truth. But you'd think that after XP and now 64 and word of Intel moving toward the Pentium M core, people would get the hint.

Overclocking dream!

[Imidazole]

Rock on! Yet another overclocker's dream processor! No wonder AMD now outsells Intel.

Cool Processor

[osewa77]

Even deep-water divers can take advantage of this technology!

Great news for people like myself...

[proxima]

My next notebook will probably contain a low-power processor. There'e the Servelinux Enote for $800 that uses a Via processor like my mini-itx motherboard, but I suspect that AMD will be able to come up with something that's a little faster (it doesn't need to be blazing, but a 800 Mhz Via runs like a 600 Mhz P3 it seems).

I'd like to have either a 2.5-3lb subnotebook with a nice 12" screen (and preferably below $1k, like the Servelinux), or a ~4lb notebook that gets a much longer battery life than anything else on the market (besides maybe a Mac), but also is below $1k. No CDROM or large screen needed in my case, cause I'm not looking for a desktop replacement.

For now, though, the Servelinux enote is too obscure for me to look at it seriously, and I'll stick with my used 7020 (?) Toshiba Portege (at a little over 4 lbs I think, with a nearly useless battery).

I've personally seen and played with the enote, anyone have comments on other laptops in the same category (maybe from Transmeta instead?). Cheap, light, and fast, pick three; I like cheap and light.

Re:Great news for people like myself...

[proxima]

Cheap, light, and fast, pick three; I like cheap and light.

Whoops, I meant pick two of course.

Re:Great news for people like myself...

[Anonymous Coward]

(it doesn't need to be blazing, but a 800 Mhz Via runs like a 600 Mhz P3 it seems).

According to benchmarks it's more like VIA 1GHz runs like a 500 MHz Celeron.

Re:Great news for people like myself...

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

"Cheap, light, and fast, pick three; I like cheap and light."

OK, then.

Go on eBay. You can get a Compaq Armada M300 (PIII 600, up to 384M of memory) for around $350. It's got a 11.5" XGA screen, it's 3.1lbs (including battery), and very thin and light (magnesium alloy case). It runs Windows XP and Linux fine, has a Cardbus slot for a wifi card, built in 56K and 10/100 ethernet, ATI Rage graphics with 4MB (horrible 3D, but fine for 2D), and a nice keyboard. Not to mention the fact that the power adaptor is tiny, and you can get a nice dock which only increases the thickness to around 1.2" (without changing the size otherwise) and adds a floppy + another drive (DVD-ROM+CD-RW, DVD burner, etc.).

Re:Great news for people like myself...

[_|()|\|]

I'd like to have either a 2.5-3lb subnotebook with a nice 12" screen (and preferably below $1k, like the Servelinux), or a ~4lb notebook that gets a much longer battery life than anything else on the market (besides maybe a Mac)

I'm looking for a light notebook with long battery life. I thought about going without a CD-ROM drive, and the ThinkPad X40 looks good in this category. However, I'd like to watch movies and play the occasional copy-protected game, so I'm waffling between an iBook and the ThinkPad T41. The iBook advertises an improbable six hours of battery life. The T41 can swap the CD-ROM drive for a battery.

Of course, these are all above your $1,000 limit.

Re:Great news for people like myself...

[BenjyD]

I got an armada m300 recently too. I get around three hours battery life, runs Linux perfectly (including speedstep etc).

Re:Great news for people like myself...

[Anonymous Coward]

You should have picked "reliable".

Waddya mean, it wasn't an option?!

Re:Great news for people like myself...

[basics]

I have P-M ThinkPad R40 -- not quite a T series, but similiar. With the standard battery (56whateveritis) I can get 6+ hours of battery time if I turn the screen brightness down all the way if I am only surfing the web or light coding w/o much compiling (on auto power mode the laptop usually runs at 600MHz, and the fan almost never switches on.

hmm

[TechnologyX]

Ferrari line

But I'm on a Ford Tempo budget.. guess it's back to leg burns for me

Re:hmm

[magarity]

But I'm on a Ford Tempo budget..

When they come out with hydrogen fuel cell laptops, please be sure not to get the Ford Pinto version.

Re:hmm

[evilviper]

When they come out with hydrogen fuel cell laptops, please be sure not to get the Ford Pinto version.

You mean a laptop that has a non-existant flaw that gets blown to incredible proportions because it's in another companies interest?

Re:Fifth Post

[Anonymous Coward]

5th, 12th, who's counting ?
Oh wait, that would be me :)
Personally (even if this guy failed) I would mod him up as "funny" (if I had modpoints)... as I haven't seen such posts (recently)...

What, for CMOS?

[The Mainframe]

"The low-voltage chips will use smaller batteries and produce less heat."

So these processors have built in batteries, eh? ;)

A non-overheating Italian car

[b0s0z0ku]

Acer plans to use them in their Ferrari line of thin laptops.
Is this the same laptop that was reviewed here a while ago? The one that makes revving sounds when booted up? Anyway, there's something wrong with putting a cool-running processor in a product named after an Italian car. Italian cars are supposed to overheat - when I had my FIAT/Pininfarina Spyder, part of the fun was sitting in traffic on a hot, humid summer day with the heater fully on to avoid cooking the engine.
b0s0z0ku

Re:A non-overheating Italian car

[Anonymous Coward]

Italian cars are supposed to overheat

As someone who grew up in the 70s I can safely say the same of American cars

Re:A non-overheating Italian car

[b0s0z0ku]

As someone who grew up in the 70s I can safely say the same of American cars Hey, and Swedish cars too! I had a SAAB that had two puny electric fans on the radiator controlled by a temperature-sensitive switch and a relay. The temperature switch would refuse to activate at the most inopportune times, and I would have to pull over and bridge the contacts of the switch with a jumper wire that I kept for that purpose. A replacement switch failed again after half a year, so I finally caved and installed a dashboard switch to activate the fans manually. I think that the cooling system was just designed for the Swedish summer climate, not for New Jersey.
-b.

Re:A non-overheating Italian car

[Anonymous Coward]

FIAT? Fix It Again Tony?

Re:A non-overheating Italian car

[b0s0z0ku]

FIAT? Fix It Again Tony?
Actually, I kind of liked the car. Parts were difficult to get, but it helped that I lived about 20 mi. from a large Fiat restoration and parts shop. Apart from the overheating, the only time that the car left me stranded was when the timing belt slipped two blocks from home after a 200 mile trip. I pushed the car the rest of the way, and changing the belt (available at the local NAPA, believe it or not) took about two hours - try that with a new front-wheel-drive car. What finally convinced me to sell the car was the transmission losing second gear because of long-standing damage from my sister's ex-boyfriend shifting into second instead of fourth gear.
-b0s0z0ku

Re:A non-overheating Italian car

[Anonymous Coward]

Photo of the laptop

Re:A non-overheating Italian car

[dirkdidit]

I currently have a Fiat Spider and it's a zippy little Italian car. Part of the fun of driving it is knowing that you may not make it back in one piece. It just shows that you can have something that comes in a small package but is mean and loves to get hot, kinda like a midget.

Re:A non-overheating Italian car

[Anonymous Coward]

On the other hand, look at Ferrari in Formula 1 - a large part of their dominance is due to the fact that they're vastly more reliable than any of their rivals, having not had a mechanical failure in over a year.

Compare that to McLaren Mercedes - counting testing and qualifying, they've lost at least five engines in the last four races.

Re:A non-overheating Italian car

[morie]

No it is latin. It translates to "May it go" (please). Really.

Ferarri Line

[The_Rippa]

Great, tens of people will be enjoying the benefits of the new processor!

Re:Ferarri Line

[magarity]

Someone I know at AMD says that a lot of the people working there have these laptops; of course, they were heavily discounted for employees.

Head dissipation and power consumption in clusters

[Anonymous Coward]

Are becoming a serious headaches. Are there manufacturers producing cluster-oriented machines based on low-power, low-heat processors? 100kW of cluster power consumption (and heat dissipation) is not unusual these days. That's rather a lot...

Why...

[rekoil]

can't anyone see the appeal of using chips like these in a ultra-quiet desktop model? A/V hobbyists would go nuts over them, providing that the CPU horsepower is sufficient...

Re:Why...

[_|()|\|]

can't anyone see the appeal of using chips like these in a ultra-quiet desktop model?

Home builders clamored for the K6-2+ and K6-III+ processors for the same reason, but they were difficult to obtain. I happily ran a Celeron 850 (~20 W, IIRC) without a CPU fan.

Interestingly, Motorola markets the G4 (7457 and 7447A) used in the iBook, Powerbook, and iMac as an embedded processor. Now, if only Apple would market a headless iMac, like the old cube ...

Re:Why...

[msimm]

providing that the CPU horsepower is sufficient..

But there's always a trade-off.

Re:Why...

[murgee]

You can buy the Athlon XP Mobile chip now, and it works in a regular Athlon board. I'd imagine the same would be tru for the Athlon64 mobiles.. 'less you're talking about OEM machines.

Re:Why...

[Jeff DeMaagd]

You can get a MiniITX board with the Pentium M processor. Look for a "Lippert's Thunderbird". A 1.3GHz Pentium M can be run 100% passively cooled, and I think it is sufficient for a great many low to no noise needs.

Re:Why...

[Anonymous Coward]

The Celerons' slow memory bus make them useless for HTPC... (Yes, I have a Coppermine Celeron 600, and the bloody thing can't play a DVD skip-free.)

Re:Why...

[justins]

The Celerons' slow memory bus make them useless for HTPC... (Yes, I have a Coppermine Celeron 600, and the bloody thing can't play a DVD skip-free.)

I had a Celeron 433 that would play a DVD well enough - without an MPEG2 decoder, I might add. Maybe the problem is not CPU-related.

Re:Why...

[Anonymous Coward]

Do desktop motherboards support the power saving features of the mobile processors?

Low Volt AMDs?

[An-Unnecessarily-Lon]

Man I want my 1.21 jigawatt proccesor.

Re:Low Volt AMDs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Man I want my 1.21 jigawatt proccesor.

Then you'd really be gettin' jiggy with it...

Re:Low Volt AMDs?

[0racle]

What the hell is a gigawatt.

hanging around

[poptones]

No way would I pay $1000 or more for a laptop computer. No matter what you do it's still going to have one of those cramped keyboards and limited expansion without carrying aroound a bag of USB goodies. And if you drop it then what? Yeah you can get an expensive new system with one of those "oops I dropped it" warranties, but that same money would buy a LOT of spare parts for an older, well built machine.

For $1500 I can have, like, 6 or 7 T600 stinkpads. Or maybe just one or two and a sack of batteries to keep it running 12 hours or more. Gets the job done, and if I drop it I don't care so much. "No one will ever need more than 500MHz and 512MB of memory."

I've had a lot of laptops and they all sucked compared to my (relatively) light, compact little thinkpad. They work great with linux and they feel so soft and squishy - if batman carried a laptop, he'd carry a classic thinkpad.

Re:hanging around

[Carnildo]

Cramped keyboards? The 15" PowerBook I'm typing this on has a keyboard with full-sized keys. They've got less travel than a normal keyboard, but that's the only difference.

Re:hanging around

[Philmeeh]

Not to mention you can just go out and buy a cheap keyboard and fit it to a USB port

Re:hanging around

[bhtooefr]

Did you misunderstand the guy's saying that he didn't want a bag of USB addons?

Re:hanging around

[mandalayx]

couldn't find any thinkpad t600 models...any references?

Re:hanging around

[Anonymous Coward]

Model number is just 600, not T600.

Re:hanging around

[dublin]

For $1500 I can have, like, 6 or 7 T600 stinkpads.

Not quite, but the older Thinkpads can be a great deal. If you want something that can travel significantly lighter than the Thinkpad 600, but with nearly identical capabilities, try to find a 570E. This is much thinner and lighter than the 600, since the heavy peripherals (CD/2nd HDD and Floppy/2nd Batttery) live in the easily removed "Ultrabase" media slice. The ethernet docking base is handy, too, but oddly, requires the Ultrabase to be snapped in place first.

I carry a 570E as my primary laptop, and have an older 570 as a backup. These are great, tough, formerly top-of-the-line machines that can be had for a decent price if you scour the web a bit. One of these days I'll need more memory and be forced to "upgrade", but for now, this is still a great, rugged machine at a fraction of the price of anything else that offers the same features (and yes, for me at least, the "thin and light" aspect far outweighs having the latest P4 battery-eater...)

Re:hanging around

[Anonymous Coward]

No way would I pay $1000 or more for a laptop computer. No matter what you do it's still going to have one of those cramped keyboards and limited expansion without carrying aroound a bag of USB goodies. And if you drop it then what? Yeah you can get an expensive new system with one of those "oops I dropped it" warranties, but that same money would buy a LOT of spare parts for an older, well built machine.

Err... $1000 total, or $1000 additional?

For a desktop-replacement notebook, $1000 is *extremely* low-end. My comfort zone is around $1500 for a low-end Toshiba, with the higher-end laptops pricing out at $2400-$2800.

You may be able to get away with a 512MB 500Mhz machine, but since this is my primary machine I want something reasonably fast (not the fastest out, a step or two down), with as much RAM as I can fit in it (now 1GB), a large hard-drive (60GB), and a high-res display (1400x1050 in a 15" size).

Personally, I'm more interested in the low-power AMD processors for small form factor systems rather then mobile systems. (SFF systems are notoriously hard to cool, and quiet is usually a design factor.)

Oh come on now....

[Anonymous Coward]

Intel's Pentium-M processors are much better processors in laptops compared to the AMD heating terminals. Who are you kidding?

AMD may be better in desktop some processors, but still far far away from intel in laptop computers.

By the way, why the hell is this hate against Intel? Intel's investment in doing research is at least 1000 times more than AMD and yet AMD gets all the credits by producing some optimized follow-up processors. Typical stupiddotters.

Re:Oh come on now....

[talornin]

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1561875 ,00.asp

Yeah. Go Intel!

I am aware that AMD did some reverse engineering themselves, but to claim that Intel does the research and inovation and that AMD is just a compycat is silly.

I dont like Intel because they charge a bucket for their CPU's and yet they dont perform better than AMD. Quite the oposite acutaly. Except the mobile models. Now, lets give AMD a chanse to proove that they can do mobile processors also.

Side by Side?

[randomErr]

Someone mentioned that Via's processors run slower then thier full powered conterparts. I can't wait until someone does a side-by=side of AMD/Via/Intel of the lower power chips.

Re:Side by Side?

[Anonymous Coward]

AMD will probably just annihilate the competition.

Re:Side by Side?

[mandalayx]

*waves hand*

these are the benchmarks that you are looking for.

Re:Side by Side?

[Dacmot]

This is near impossible to do. Benchmarks are usually done with equal hardware except for the processors and motherboard (for mobos you only need one per processor if you do many processors from the same manufacturer). For a desktop computer it's easy to switch the parts in and out and use the same hard-drive/ram/etc. but for laptops you have to use entirely different laptops for every processor tested which a) is expensive and b) skews the benchmarks results.

How long before Enderle

[chadjg]

quits seizing, wipes the drool off of his face and writes us up another gem about this one?

Acer plans to use them in their Ferrari line of thin laptops.

Vroom Vroom....

Source Bias?

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like CoolTechZone is another FanBoi site (this one for AMD, or at least anti-Intel):

"AMD is currently leading the desktop processor market without a doubt with it's 64-bit processors."

Without a doubt? That sounds a little bit like "Ferrari is currently leading the automobile market without a doubt with it's Enzo model."

Re:We can only hope

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not too often that I get a good laugh like the one I had from your comment... I am just worried about the gay nigger association of america's response.

Yay, even hotter slow laptops!

[Anonymous Coward]

Soon we'll have laptops with 1THz 128-bit CPUs that can have up to 16 simultaneous hyperthreads running, all blocked on dog-slow laptop hard disk I/O 99.9999% of the time. We won't notice because our penises will explode in a cloud of steam as soon as we turn them on.

Awesome!

Re:Yay, even hotter slow laptops!

[68K]

You might not care about losing your penis, but I sure do. ;-)

Not ohm's law

[poptones]

the cpu isn't a static device - those transistors switching is what causes the heat, and from a power perspective those are teeny little capacitors each and every one. Doubling the voltage will cause a relative quadrupling of power stored in the junction. This is why jacking up core coltage just a tenth of a volt when overclocking can cause such dramatic heat increases inside the box.

Q=CV^2

Re:Not ohm's law

[rco3]

No. Ohm's law is in play. Charging a capacitor takes in energy, yes, but that energy is stored as charge, not radiated as heat. The heat comes from I^2*R loss. The I part comes when the capacitor must be charged.

So, it's really pretty simple. Lower voltages mean that the capacitors don't take in as much charge, and therefore don't require as much current to charge up. Less current == less I^2*R loss == less power consumed.

You can get similar improvements by reducing the size of the capacitances, which can be done by reducing the size of the FET gates... which means a smaller feature size.

You are correct that the transistors look mostly like capacitors, but you are incorrect in stating that power is stored in the junction and that creates heat. Power is dissipated in the interconnects, sources and drains, and in the vias between layers. This is also one big reason why we went to copper - lower resistance interconnects == less power lost to resistance.

Re:Transmeta, also Side by Side?

[gabbarbhai]

Should they ever decide to actually ship their Efficeon chips in a laptop, it will also make an interesting comparison..

Low-voltage + PowerNow == PentiumM Competition

[david_reese]

Previously, only the VIA and Transmeta chips were in the same range of power consumption (actually much less) as the Pentium-M (which, tho I'm an AMD fan, is a pretty sweet processor). But those processors were pretty lightweight in the power department.

Now the Athlon64 mobiles, which already run at a cool 800Mhz when not taxed, combined with a voltage decrease, should create something that is at the same time powerful, yet battery-preserving.

Kicker: it's AMD64, so if you have 64bit OS and apps, it will really dominate.

Re:Low-voltage + PowerNow == PentiumM Competition

[raodin]

Actually they had Athlon XP-M low voltage models too, in the same range of power consumption as the new (Athlon64) ones. Fujitsu used them in their thin and light line, as well as Averatec. Probably a couple other thin and lights with them, as well. The summary for the article is a bit misleading, it makes it sound like these are the first LV cpus AMD has released. The actual news is that they're releasing LV Athlon64s.

Re:Low-voltage + PowerNow == PentiumM Competition

[david_reese]

Take a look at the transmeta review that someone else posted in a different thread.

A really great article, the only thing I wish they'd have really tested is battery life (although admitted that would be more like testing the notebooks themselves, not the processors).

Anyway, check out the comparison of the Athlon64 3200+ vs. the Banias (Pentium-M) 1400. Even scaling up the Banias's numbers by 21% (to give a 1.7Ghz max) and scaling the Athlon64's numbers down 21% (to 2700+), it looks like the A64M totally kicks ass... and this isn't even using 64bit code!

This could spell a possible problem for Intel who has held the crown of the "sweet spot": a powerful, battery conscious mobile processor (AthlonXPs don't step down well, and lets not even talk about the P4Ms)

Re:Low-voltage + PowerNow == PentiumM Competition

[servognome]

The problem is you don't take into account the effect of cutting in half the L2 cache on the A64-mobile. The low power 2700 has 512kb vs 1MB on the 65W brothers

Re:Low-voltage + PowerNow == PentiumM Competition

[evilviper]

Previously, only the VIA and Transmeta chips were in the same range of power consumption (actually much less)

Why do people keep doing this? Sure VIA processors are lower power than current Intel/AMD processors, but that's because VIA processors have terrible performance. If you compare a 1GHz VIA processor to a 500MHz Pentium, you'll see that both the performance and power usage are very similar.

I'm quite psyched about AMD's new processors though. AMD's XP procs have been beating Intel at maximum power consumption even with better performance, and AMD have finally started kicking their chipset manufacturers into line. I think the effect AMD64 had on AMD's whole company has been far more significant than the processor itself.

Re:Great!

[Wehesheit]

Theres an ambulance industry?

with the water tank for steam

[Anonymous Coward]

They can market it as a water cooled solution

We Want Low Power CPU on the *DESKTOP* too

[Wolfier]

I'm sure a lot of us are looking towards the day where we can eliminate all crazy spinning fans from our computers.

Re:We Want Low Power CPU on the *DESKTOP* too

[Brian Stretch]

Or do the next best thing:

1) Buy an Athlon 64 PC
2) Enable PowerNow! power management
3) Buy a power supply with a variable-speed fan (I recommend this one) and enable CPU fan speed control on the motherboard (Q-Fan in ASUS's BIOS, IIRC).

When you're just reading Slashdot, the CPU runs at 800MHz and power consumption drops waaay down. When you're playing UT2004, the CPU runs flat out and the fans speed up. It works extremely well.

Re:We Want Low Power CPU on the *DESKTOP* too

[evilviper]

I'm sure a lot of us are looking towards the day where we can eliminate all crazy spinning fans from our computers.

Here we go again...
It always has been, and still is, entirely possible to have a system without any fans.

Just about any processor can be run with nothing but a large heatsink provide that you underclock it significantly. Drop a 2GHz processor down to 800MHz and you probably won't need a fan.

Oh, so you want a your system without a fan to be fast, eh? Well there's always water-cooling. But of course, you don't want to spend that much... Well, you can't have it all. If you choose silence, you have to spend a lot of money, or get poor performance.

Personally, I think the best way to just to replace the crappy fans and heatsinks with a tempurature controlled themaltake... Then when your processor is cool the fans will be slow and silent, but when your processor are running hot, the fans can cool everything down. I happen to like that tradeoff the best.

Choosing between AMD and Intel is difficult. Intel processor have a higher maximum tempurature, but they run cooler under typical load. AMD has recently been trying to fix this. This just happens to be a subject I detailed in my latest Journal entry.

Re:We Want Low Power CPU on the *DESKTOP* too

[Jugalator]

Personally, I think the best way to just to replace the crappy fans and heatsinks with a tempurature controlled themaltake... Then when your processor is cool the fans will be slow and silent, but when your processor are running hot, the fans can cool everything down. I happen to like that tradeoff the best.

Yes, this work great, and I'd also like to point out that noise-absorbing case paddings can significantly lower the noise generated by vibrations for a rather low cost. Combined with your solution, you should have a not silent system, but silent enough to not be too annoyed by it.

Re:We Want Low Power CPU on the *DESKTOP* too

[hc00jw]

Drop a 2GHz processor down to 800MHz and you probably won't need a fan.

Oh, so you want a your system without a fan to be fast, eh?

No! That's exactly the point! 800MHz checks my e-mails, browses the Internet, creates text documents, and runs the terminal all just fine, thank you very much! A silent 800MHz processor would be heaven! I don't have the time / money, but maybe soon...

(Brought to you by a 800MHz G4)

Re:We Want Low Power CPU on the *DESKTOP* too

[Uerige]

Careful with that! Usually, when you've got case paddings, the computer runs a lot warmer than without them, which would lead to the fans spinning up -- there goes the silent system. You've got to choose between the two solutions.

Re:We Want Low Power CPU on the *DESKTOP* too

[TheLink]

So when are you moving to Alaska? ;)

Re:We Want Low Power CPU on the *DESKTOP* too

[Wolfier]

Soon ;) I'm in Canada so it's not far from Alaska anyways.

COOLER AMD PROCESSORS?!

[ShadowRage]

Hell must be frozen over...

hey, they need those hot amd processos to heat the place you know...

Article and summary are wrong

[The Wicked Priest]

The announcement is of the mobile, low-voltage Athlon 64, not just the mobile, low-voltage Athlon -- which has been in the very machine I'm typing on for nearly a year. This is referenced in one place in the article, but the chips are misleadingly referred to simply as "Athlon" in the title, and several more times.

compactness

[poptones]

If it's got a 15" screen then it's considerably larger than a T600, which barely is large enough for the 13.3" TFT. It's not thin enough to cut in half with scissors, but it's still about the compactness (well, and the general adaptability - spare parts are plentiful and cheap).

The thinkpad also has full size keys but the layout isn't "full size" and having everything cramped together makes typing on any laptop, for me, feel claustrophobic.

Re:compactness

[Anonymous Coward]

having everything cramped together makes typing on any laptop, for me, feel claustrophobic

You should see a shrink.

Actually

[Run4yourlives]

An Athalon XP runs cooler than an Intel PIV...which is probably why we haven't heard much about evil CPU temps anymore...

Re:Actually

[tomstdenis]

Um? How about not.

I'll take by your inability to spell Athlon you're just trolling but...

The P4 may be rated as higher wattage but it certainly doesn't run "hotter". I've had quite a few Athlons [tbird 1200, 1400, 1800+, 2400+, 3000+ and a duron 1.3Ghz for kicks] and all of them have idled hotter than my first P4 [2.80C Northwood].

I think those people who bitch about the P4 heat are

a) running first generation P4's
or
b) overclocking the device
or
c) using defective cooling.

Granted I have a later generation P4 [Stepping=9 iirc] but with a 50$ Thermaltake Polo cooler the cpu idles at only a few degrees over ambient (well around 10C or so) and under load gets luke warm to the touch (my guess 25C over ambient).

My Athlon 3000+ with an 80$ radiator Zen cooler idled at 23C over ambient. Certainly I was cooling it correctly, heck I had the sides off my case and a 12" desk fan blowing on the thing...

Honestly I'm either super lucky or just have my box setup correctly because I can't fathom overheating my P4 processor.

Tom

Re:Actually

[Froug]

The P4 may be rated as higher wattage but it certainly doesn't run "hotter".

Higher operational wattage will equate to more heat. It's an inevitable application of thermodynamics. If your P4 is cooler than a lower-rated Athlon, then it would have to be because it wasn't operating at its rated power for some time before you took the temperature.

I'd expect this, though, because of the P4's proper power management when idle. It'll only ever be operating at peak wattage if it's actually being pegged at 100%, and even compiles and games don't really peg the CPU at 100% every microsecond.

You see similar thermal performance on the Athlon when running "cooling" software to disconnect the CPU bus when idle. It's mindbogglingly stupid that the design requires using ACPI (if you want STPGNT issued automatically), and going out of your way to flip a bit in the northbridge... but if you're actually using that facility, then AMD's chips don't run very hot either. The machine I'm typing this on right now has a Barton 3000+, and is idling at 32C with the AMD stock heat sink. I'm using VCool. It can also throttle down the CPU rather than just shut it down as heat mounts, which is another hardware feature present in the Athlon that AMD sadly doesn't just have the processor handle on its own.

My Athlon 3000+ with an 80$ radiator Zen cooler idled at 23C over ambient. Certainly I was cooling it correctly, heck I had the sides off my case and a 12" desk fan blowing on the thing...

The Zen is horribly overrated. It does piss-poor job at cooling, but it certainly is well-hyped. The turbine cooling design is only effective at very high airflow; something which a pair of 60mm fans will not supply (in fact, having a second fan makes things worse because of turbulence between the two fans). Instead, the air spends too much time trapped in the radiator and is actually less efficient than an open heat sink. It's far beyond a safe weight, sounds like the jet engine it's modeled after, and is a terrible waste of resources using pulsating heatpipe construction without the airflow neccessary to make it worthwhile. Not to sound insulting, but it's typical of aftermarket component manufacturers whenever they try something new. It's a design that sounds great on its face, but practical physics dictate otherwise. They either don't do the math, or they do and decide that it's "good enough" to sell and recoup the research costs.

It should also be noted that the Zen is now sold caveat emptor, and for good reason. Here's a review/product warning concerning the Zen; one of many.

Okay, having the sides off the case and a desk fan blowing in it is NOT proper cooling. You will trap a lot of dust in and on all cooling components, which will reduce their effectiveness. This stuff will clog the fan and really cake on to everything, requiring scraping/solvent to remove if you let it build up long enough.

You're also creating an area of warm air over the motherboard as the incoming air from the fan mixes with the hot air and pushes against the board itself to escape sideways. The resulting billowing effect means that the hot air lingers around the processor long enough to ensure it's always shrouded in air that's a bit above ambient. This is in addition to hampering cooling fans by creating turbulence.

Proper cooling of your system involves straight paths through for the air. Ideally you should have air intakes on the bottom front or sides of your case, and exhaust out the power supply (proper power supplies are designed for this, so there's no need to be shy about passing the CPU's waste heat through it) or optionally a "blowhole" at the top. This ensures a constant supply of cool (and calm) air for all components.

The P4 is definitely the better choice for you heat-wise and it's great that you're happy with it, because quite frankly, you seem to be an idiot when it comes to thermal management. You'd probably damn well kill your processor if it didn't have management built-in.

Junk

[poptones]

I've had two Vaios and they both died due to inadequate heat dissipation. Not enough cooling on the CPU = heat destroyed capacitors = flaky, dying laptops that cost more than the laptop is worth for repair.

Not to mention they came with the slowest hard drives of any preassembled computer I ever bought. I didn't pay for either of'em, and I'm glad. No way would I spend my pennies on ANYTHING labelled Sony.

If you think you like it, buy it

[zome]

My friend has it. It's very small very light and doesn't get too hot. Screen is very good, way better than my Dell inspiron 2100. My 2100 is small for a notebook, but it looks huge compare to Sharp. I'm hoping that Sharp comes up with 12" SXGA+ screen. My dell is breaking apart and I'm gonna need new notebook soon

low-voltage low-power?

[dnoyeb]

Now that is odd because normally higher voltages lead to smaller i-squared losses due to heat dissipation.

Perhaps though on the chemical side, its tougher to generate higher voltages with batteries?

Re:low-voltage low-power?

[Anonymous Coward]

For a number of reasons this is simply not the case with processors.

Re:low-voltage low-power?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you're thinking of power distribution losses. The energy lost in getting the elctricity to the chip is insignificant. The gates on the CPU act like little capacitors that need to be charged to the logical high voltage and discharged to the logical low voltage. Note that resistance isn't all that significant. Primarily, resistance determines how fast you can transition between valid logic levels at a given core voltage. (If the internal resistance is lower, you need to crank up the voltage less when over-clocking.)

More or less, CPU power scales as the product of frequency and the square of voltage.

Breaking News

[PhrostyMcByte]

Rap star Jay-Z announces his new Jiggawatt processor.

Re:we can only hope Rumsfeld gets his ass canned

[Anonymous Coward]

You make an important point. A more realistic alternative is to begin impeachment proceedings for George W. Bush. Freedom lovers shouldn't pass up this opportunity when Bush is at his most vulnerable.

incorrect

[poptones]

But you are incorrect in saying I said "power is stored in the junction and that creates heat." I made it clear that it was just the opposite, in fact.. did you miss that part?

Re:incorrect

[rco3]

"Doubling the voltage will cause a relative quadrupling of power stored in the junction"

No, you certainly didn't make it clear that you said just the opposite. Power isn't stored in a capacitor. Nor is power stored in a junction. Nor is power dissipated in a (perfect) capacitor. Power is, however, dissipated in a junction.

Frankly, what you said didn't make much sense at all. Moreover, you titled your comment "Not Ohm's law" when in fact it exactly IS Ohm's law which is involved. "Q=CV^2". True. Notice, however, that there is no mention of power in that equation.

I still don't understand what you meant. However, with my [buffs fingernails on shirt] masters in EE, I do understand how power dissipation in VLSI works. I'm very sorry if I misinterpreted what you were trying to say.

Re:incorrect

[poptones]

Power isn't stored in a capacitor. Nor is power stored in a junction.

Charge is stored in a capacitor. Doesn't matter how many hoops you care to jump through to get there, what I said was accurate. "Mr.E"

Re:incorrect

[rco3]

Whatever. Try reading your own post again. Parts of what you said were accurate. I've pointed out the errors, and if you don't want to understand better that's your problem. I suppose I should stop wasting my time, huh?

Re:incorrect

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, dumbass!

Re:Actually stop talking out of your ass

[Moocowsia]

So you're comparing a P4 with a 78CFM fan and a copper heatsink to a Athlon XP 3000+ with a pos radiator and a couple low flow 60mm fans? Might be a good idea to get a decent heatsink on that thing, that thing is a pos. I have my AXP running quiet at about 45C using a Volcano 7.

I'm also wondering why you think newer a newer generation P4 is better? The latest generation ones have a higher heat output than all the rest. 103 watts! The A64s are more around the range of 75 watts. The P4"c" you are talking about is around the 80 watt range as well.

Re:Actually stop talking out of your ass

[tomstdenis]

"running" you mean full load or idle? 45C is higher than the 43C I got with my "pos" cooler.

Also my 78CFM fan is at the lowest speed [not highest] and it only gets ~25CFM [iirc] at the current speed [of around 2300-2500RPMs].

And why I think newer is better? Because my P4 *actually* runs cooler and it *actually* doesn't shutdown because of heat during full load and it *actually* performs nicely for games, development and building.

I've been a diehard AMD fan for the longest while. But whatever you may *think* about the P4 my P4 box *actually* performs and is cool at very modest cooling conditions.

Tom

lol

[poptones]

Yeah, it's posted AC but it's still funny...

Whats the process technology?

[Colourspace]

When you get to 90nm features on a processor the gate leakage of the transistors increases by quite a high degree - so although you get a voltage step down the power remains the same or increases... I would guess this is a .13um process.. Anyone know?

voltage means nothing

[Transcendent]

What's the power usage?

Averatec 3200 series

[lateralus_1024]

If you want small and cheap, go for an Averatec
It's 12.1", 4lbs and has a molten lava AMD mobile proc(2000+), non-removable cdrw/dvd and runs for ~$750,after Best Buy rebate. *ducks*

Yay for misinformation....

[Ahkorishaan]

Your very uninformed sir... The Pentium - M has more cache for precisely the thing you blamed AMD for having. Their core is woefully inneficient, though I must say the Banias core is heads and shoulders and then some over the P4 in that aspect. OK here's a crash course on how a Pentium operates diffrently from an AMD. The Pentium has a much longer pipeline than the AMD, a pipeline is the route the information travels to be computed. The longer the pipeline, the longer it takes to fill with information, the longer it takes to get things done. Fortunately for intel, it also allows you to ramp up the clockspeed to ridiculous speeds. So, to keep the pipeline full after a missed claculation a Pentium needs more cache, so that it doesn't have to go all the way to the system memory for the informaion. AMD has a shorter pipeline, a better branch predicter, and that allows it to complete more instructions per clock. Therefore the AMD is actually the more efficient processor. Ok Intel finally made an intelligent move with the Pentium M core, the shortened the pipeline... alot. This allows them to do more instructructions per clock, as AMD does. The main reason that Pentium Ms have such low power consumption is that they are a core that has been designed ground up for mobile computing. They have no desktop counterpart. The closest there is is the Pentum 3, and that is an ancient ancestor. Performance. I guarentee the AMD will sweep the floor with Pentium in gaming, and office, and will likely have equal battery drain in normal usage due to Cool n' Quiet, which is the best throttling there is. Don't be so quick to write them off because of mere history. Historically, they don't innovate, they follow. But who made x86-64?

Re:Yay for misinformation....

[bezza]

Thats all super, but you do realise that the Pentium -M is based on the PIII as opposed to the P4? It shares an architecture with the PIII, making everything you said redundant.

Re:Yay for misinformation....

[Ahkorishaan]

I admitted that P-M is based off P3. But the fact still exists that it needs the cache so it's pipeline stays full. Otherwise the cache wouldn't be neccessary and Intel wouldn't put it in there, it does cost alot to have that much cache on a chip, so it wouldn't be smart to do unless there was a good reason.

Re:Yay for misinformation....

[bezza]

A large amount of cache helps any chip, and is one of the reasons that the Pentium-M is such a strong performer. It is also not ridiculously expensive, so Intel must be doing something right.

I would still give anything to have one in my desktop, however.

Electrical theory tutorial...

[evilviper]

Lots of incorrect knowledge has been passing around /., so here's a nice quick tutorial about basic electricity.

Everything electric needs a certain number of watts to operate. Your Computer is about the same as a 100watt lightbulb. Wattage is voltage times current (amps), which means, less votage requires more current to do the same ammount of work.

Since voltage is not consumed, but current is, it only makes sense to use higher voltages, in order to preserve current. This can be seen very clearly on the specs of your computer's power supply. Your computer may need 100watts to operate, but you can choose between two different voltages. If you are running at 110v, you are drawing nearly 1 amp. However, if you throw the switch and plug in to 220v, you can operate the same equipment at under 1/2 amp.

I know this is a bit difficult to understand, so let's go with the shower analogy... Voltage is like water pressure, and current is like the volume of water. When you screw-on a "water conserving" shower nossle, what it does is increase the pressure. That makes the water spray just as far, while using less water to do it.

So, if you get the idea, you'll understand that decreasing a device's voltage does NOT mean you'll have better battery life. In fact, if all else remains equal, it guarantees worse battery life.

Now, I'd bet that AMD is decreasing the current used, while also decreasing the voltage, but that's just an asumption. The story only says it's decreasing voltage, which doesn't improve your battery life at all.

Re:Electrical theory tutorial...

[dpletche]

Unfortunately (for you), your grade school science lecture on electricity is not applicable to the power consumption of a CPU. There is no meaningful comparison to be made between a passive device like a light bulb or a water pump, and a nonlinear device like a CPU.

The dominant term in the CPU power consumption function is proportional to the square of the supply voltage, relating to the power consumed when charging a capacitor (or transistor). Using higher voltage can enable a CPU to achieve a greater clock rate, at the expense of diminished reliability and operating lifespan. However, since the CPU is not a system designed for the primary purpose of transforming electrical energy into heat, mechanical or radiant energy, it is not necessary to compensate for lower voltage with increased amperage in order to keep power level constant.

You are using a circular argument to support your flawed assumption that a CPU must maintain a certain level of power consumption regardless of applied voltage. Moreover, you are incorrect in stating that reducing voltage (assuming constant amperage) does not increase battery life. The battery is used to drive an efficient DC to DC converter in the power supply, so reduced supply voltage for the CPU translates into reduced battery current and power consumption.

Finally, your example about the water-saving showerhead is oversimplified, to put it nicely.

I wonder if I just fell for a troll...

Re:Electrical theory tutorial...

[PlazMan]

For a CMOS-based processor, there are two main components to power: switching and leakage. Switching power generally dominates, though with lower voltage processes, leakage current is getting troublesome.

At any rate, the typical way to calculate power for a processor is using the equation P = C*V^2*f

Where C = the average amount of capacitance that has to switch state (e.g. a 1 switching to a 0) on each cycle, V = the supply voltage, and f = the number of cycles per second (frequency).

So lowering the voltage is a very good way to reduce power on a processor. And yes, this directly causes the amount of current required by the device to be reduced. Your reasoning that lowered voltage might cause reduced battery life is specious.

The problem with lower voltage processes is that the switching times of the transistors slows down dramatically (i.e. it won't run as fast). To combat that, the threshold voltage of the transistors has to be reduced, which increases leakage current exponentially.

Re:Electrical theory tutorial...

[corngrower]

Grandparent has correct understanding. A battery is rated in Amp-Hours. If you uses the same battery for processor A as for low-Voltage processor B, AND processor A and B use the same amperage (probably not true) then battery life using either processors is the same. Processor B uses less Power than processor A, but that POWER would have to be dissapated (wasted) across the voltage regulator.

Battery life for processor A:

N -amp hours/ A1 amps = x hours

Battery life for processor B:

N -amp hours/ A2 amps = x hours (since A1 = A2)

If however, as normally is the case, that when you reduce the Voltage, the Amperage goes down as well (in proportion) then you get a longer battery life with processor B. (Even with dropping excess voltage across regulator)

Also, if you use a different battery ( 2.4 V instead of 3.6 V ) you can have a battery with 1.5 times as much A-H capacity in the same amount of space. The battery life again increases with processor B.

Advantages $350

[Deliveranc3]

How come even wallmart can see the advantages of a $199 PC and no one has figured out that people will suffer an 8" screen and a p300 if you give us a $350 laptop with decent battery life (12).

Hell the thing can weight 4 pounds if you like, you are so close to gaining the lucrative PDA money pit market share, come on people!

Screw laptops--make my computer quiet!!!

[swordgeek]

Low power means less heat dissipation, which means no CPU fans. This is a good thing in all computers, not just laptops.

Consider the added effects--having low enough heat loss that you can live with a passive heat sink means that you're also saving the power that it would take to drive your cooling fan(s). For every watt of power consumed by your CPU, you're probably sucking 2-4 watts for your whole system.

As an aside, my firewall is an old P-II/233MHz, and I'm stocking up on spare parts for it because it was about the last x86 processor that could be run without a CPU fan. Hopefully I'll be able to get a fanless and nearly silent machine as surplus for my next firewall, but the way things are going, it's going to be a few years yet.

Re:Screw laptops--make my computer quiet!!!

[EnglishDude]

I'm using a 533MHz fanless EPIA 5000 motherboard as a server. Fine, its not an Intel CPU, but it does x86 code just fine.

Yeah its slow, but very low power, I mean, I used to use an K6-3 400 as a server, but my electricity meter was wizzing past fast, so I switched to the motherboard (had a spare one sitting in a cupboard anyway) and the meter slowed down a lot. Much better.

Yes it's slow, but if I can run Smoothwall 2 on a 486 100 with 16Mb RAM, it should run just fine on the EPIA motherboard. Though, said 486 has no fan anywhere apart from the PSU, even then the PSU automatically adjusts the fan depending on how hot the PSU is despite being ancient and coming with the 486. Works well, though the web interface is a bit slow especially if parsing the logs.

Oh yeah the EPIA motherboard is bloody tiny too ;)

Fastest EPIA motherboard without a fan is 600MHz I think, but you can get a 1.2GHz EPIA board with a fansink - even tho I'm sure the fan is very quiet.

Underclock

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't you just seriously underclock a more modern processor to reduce the heat levels to something that doesn't need a fan?

But this time...

[daybyter]

But this time, they should also support the used processor in the BIOS. Unlike they did in the Aspire series (no PowerNow support for the built-in chip in my Aspire 1351LC).

low power

[v1x]

I dont understand why, if its possible to make low power-consumption varieties of the hot-running desktop chips that AMD and Intel seem to keep coming up with, they dont make more of an effort for marketting it. Although small, I'm sure there must be a market out there for cool running, low-power varieties of these processors for something besides laptops. Considering the incredibly noisy machine I have on my desktop at work, I wouldnt mind going for something like that at all.

Quiet Computing

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out:

http://endpcnoise.com/

I bought a p4 system last year and it's more quiet than my thinkpad. Support companies selling quiet systems!!

Nice price. :-)

[richmaine]

Not bad at 21 to 24 cents per processor.
According to the article, they cost $209 to $241
per thousand units. Pretty decent. :-)

Re:Watt? You've got my volt!

[lcsjk]

I agree with you. So far, I also have RESISTED the urge.

Quite!

[poptones]

I just added it up: I've spent (just on thinkpad parts) less than $1000 in the last three months. I have assembled from these purchases 6 thinkpads - one with a 12" screen, five with 13" screens. Most have 300MHz CPUs although one is 366MHz and one is a 500MHz PIII t600x model. (Well, that's sorta a lie - it's actually a 600x motherboard with the rest of the stuff from a DOA 266MHz model I picked up for about 50 bucks.) I also have an assload of spare parts including a stack of those hard drive covers that are currently going for about twenty bucks each. The two that have "shipped" went with decent batteries and 2GB hard drives - the rest I'll offer without battery warranty with larger (6GB) hard drives. Easy 50% profit on each; won't get rich on that, but it's enough to pay for the hobby and have a few extra bucks each month to put in the Benz kitty.

If I wanted to put together four more machines that I would back with a proper 90 day warranty it would cost maybe another $400 for warrantied hard drives and new batteries. That's less than $1500, although selling them at $325 a pop it would suck up most of my profit. Most folks I know use their laptops plugged in all the time and don't care about good batteries and I stand behind the rest of the unit.

BTW it's "CD/2nd HDD/Floppy/2nd Battery" - they all fit interchangeably in the same slot.

I probably shouldn't be giving away the store like this here, but these are real gems. The 570E may be a bit thinner, but it's also less supported - there doesn't seem to be as many of them around, so the 570 unique parts are much more expensive. And no, I agree about not needing a smoking P4 laptop - I'd much rather have that extra money for something more useful - like, I dunno, a decent used car that won't suck my wallet dry at the pump. :)

Re:Actually stop talking out of your ass

[Moocowsia]

The prescott isnt better. Anyways if your computer is shutting down at full load it indicates that your computer is either drawing too much current from your psu or that your HSF is indeed a pos.

Re:An Overstatement At Best

[nihkee]

This is like the Chewbacca defense! Completely irrelevant to the topic.