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

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: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: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.

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: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: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: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?

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: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: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...