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.
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..
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!!!
Boycott everything - they're all trying to fuck you one way or another
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
Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
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.
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.
"The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
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.
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.
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
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.
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.
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?)
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.