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..
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.
Marge, get me your address book, 4 beers, and my conversation hat.
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?
True story.
If laptops start producing less heat, then what are we going to use for leg warmers on those cold winterery days?
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.
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.
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
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.
~Someday, I hope to be an aspiring author.
Ferrari line
But I'm on a Ford Tempo budget.. guess it's back to leg burns for me
Slashdot sucks
"The low-voltage chips will use smaller batteries and produce less heat."
;)
So these processors have built in batteries, eh?
--Bennett Prescott
Former Lord Of Packets
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
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
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...
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.
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.
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).
~Someday, I hope to be an aspiring author.
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.
I'm sure a lot of us are looking towards the day where we can eliminate all crazy spinning fans from our computers.
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.
Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
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.
Ce n'est pas un vrai mouvement de robot!