Slashdot Mirror
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.
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.
FuckTheFuckingFuckers.com - Post your th
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 :)
By reading this signature you agree to not disagree with the post you just read.
Thanks for proving my theory that any attempt at a joke that gets posted early will be modded up.
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?
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
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.
FuckTheFuckingFuckers.com - Post your th
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...
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?
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.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
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."
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.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
Should they ever decide to actually ship their Efficeon chips in a laptop, it will also make an interesting comparison..
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.
Open Source Java DAO Generator
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?
I'm sure a lot of us are looking towards the day where we can eliminate all crazy spinning fans from our computers.
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), ... .
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
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.
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 ;)
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.
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.
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...
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
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...
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).
#include "coucou.h"