Slashdot Mirror


Intel's Atom — First Benchmarks and a Full PC Review

Barence writes "PC Pro has received, benchmarked and discussed the first Intel Atom processor to be seen in the wild. A full analysis of the Atom processor itself is accompanied by a full review of the first PC — yes it's a PC, not a laptop — to use one. The benchmark results are pretty much as expected, but it's the power savings that really excite. And as a rep from the PC maker, Tranquil, joked — they could have left the Atom CPU uncooled if they'd really wanted to prove a point, as it's the old graphics chip that produces 70% of the heat coming from the motherboard. Exciting times ahead for the upcoming Atom-based Eee and friends." MojoKid was one of several readers, too, to mention the upcoming Eee Box mini-desktop from Asus (also Atom-based), which is supposed to start from $299, writing "although the actual dimensions are listed, the image from ASUS' booth really gives a sense of scale. In the picture, the Eee Box is standing next to a paperback book."

28 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. AMD competition by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think AMD's competitive processor should be called the 'Eve'.

    That is all.

    1. Re:AMD competition by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Funny

      And Intel's ad campaign should have Radiation Man saying, "Up and Atom!"

      Fallout Boy could sing the ad jingle.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:AMD competition by DrSkwid · · Score: 4, Funny

      Steve would be better ;)

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  2. Atom benchmarks against Celeron-M and Pentium-M by IYagami · · Score: 4, Informative
  3. Echoes of the "Sidewinder" by JSBiff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ok, I don't remember for sure if I have the name right, but I remember, back about 1998 or 2000, there was a company showcasing these tiny, power efficient PC's which had a form-factor somewhat similar to that Eee mini-PC in the linked image from the article. I think they used an ARM, or maybe it was Alpha, RISC processor, and came with some Linux distro.

    I think the main downfall of that endeavor was that 1) the computers weren't Intel compatible, or Mac compatible, so you had to use Linux or BSD on them (and would have needed an Intel emulator on top of that to run any binaries compiled for Intel), I think, in order to keep them small and relatively cheap (they were still, I think, like 600 bucks, so kind of expensive, considering you could get generic PC's for about 400) and 3) the company that produced them was too small and simply lacked the funding necessary to survive in any case.

    Still, I've always thought tiny-form factor PCs were nifty. If you could get one that was powerful enough, with decent enough video, you could use them as the basis for your own set-top boxes, routers, and things like that, or even just a small, low-power, inconspicuous server.

    1. Re:Echoes of the "Sidewinder" by bhima · · Score: 3, Funny

      It was pegasus

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    2. Re:Echoes of the "Sidewinder" by isfry · · Score: 3, Informative

      those were the DEC boxes I think they were 166 Mhz Alpha's and they shipped with NT Alpha which was pretty much worthless unless you really liked to re-compile all programs. and didn't need support past SP4. so most boxes ended up with Linux pretty soon. Didn't Slashdot run on one in the early years?

    3. Re:Echoes of the "Sidewinder" by johnw · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think you're thinking of the NetWinder. They were ARM based. I have a couple in my store.

    4. Re:Echoes of the "Sidewinder" by BJH · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're mixing up two similar (in form factor) machines, that were otherwise quite different in architecture and time of availability.

      One is the Alpha-based DEC Multia/UDB, from way back in the mid '90s. LITTLE-KNOWN FACT: Slashdot was originally run on one of these.

      The other is the StrongARM-based Netwinder, which appeared around the year 2000.

      They did have one thing in common other than their size - they both tended to overheat if they weren't stood up vertically.

  4. Microsoft as Hardware Cop? by BACPro · · Score: 4, Interesting
    From TFA

    Microsoft won't allow PCs to be sold with > 80GB HDDs preloaded with Windows XP and thus the top end configuration is only available with Linux.


    Anybody have any idea why Microsoft would want to limit the amount of HDD space on a machine?
    1. Re:Microsoft as Hardware Cop? by RManning · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Anybody have any idea why Microsoft would want to limit the amount of HDD space on a machine?

      I have no URL to back this up, but I know M$ only allows XP to be preloaded on low-end PCs. This is to keep the Vista numbers up. Maybe that's why?

    2. Re:Microsoft as Hardware Cop? by harry666t · · Score: 4, Funny

      > Anybody have any idea why Microsoft would want
      > to limit the amount of HDD space on a machine?

      Don't you know? MS would like to encourage users to switch to alternative operating systems. Bill Gates himself said:

      > "Guys like us avoid monopolies. We like to compete."

      They're crafting a challenge for themselves (:

    3. Re:Microsoft as Hardware Cop? by mikeabbott420 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A crude way to force more powerful machines to use Vista. They can't use Vista levels of bloat in the emerging niche of MIDs ( or whatever they're called this week) but they still want to force everyone else to buy Vista. A big part of the Vista bloat and driver problems is Microsofts dream of DRM controlling our computers so they can make deals with content owners. Thus Microsoft needs to limit user choice as much as they can because XP may be good enough for your needs but its DRM isn't good enough for Microsoft needs.

      --
      This program was made possible by a grant from the Ultra-Humanite, and viewers like you.
    4. Re:Microsoft as Hardware Cop? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Differentiation. They are not limiting the size of the hard drive, they are limiting the size of the hard drive you are allowed to ship to qualify for very steep OEM discounts. They are attempting to sell the idea of 'XP on small/cheap machines, Vista on big/expensive machines' to avoid the market deciding that what it really wants is Linux on small/cheap machines. They can't compete directly with Linux on price (unless they pay people to ship Windows, which would only work if they then sold these customers Office or something), but they can compete on legacy compatibility. People aren't willing to pay 50% more for a laptop to run their legacy software, but the might be willing to pay 10-20% more, and so they offer a cheap version of Windows for cheap computers in the hope that people will say 'it's $20 more, but that's probably worth it to be able to run my old programs'. Whether or not this will work remains to be seen.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:Microsoft as Hardware Cop? by rsmith-mac · · Score: 4, Informative

      Snarky answers aside, MS is selling XP for miniature devices at a very, very low price, far lower than XP normally goes for. This allows OEMs to hit the low prices they want, as otherwise Windows would be a very big piece of the price. But Microsoft also had to keep the OEMs from installing this version of XP in place of a full version, so they set up fairly arbitrary limitations that ensure that it's only installed in such miniature (read: underpowered) devices. It's basically the same chain of logic as to why XP/Vista Starter Editions are so cheap; cheap Windows is for cheap devices, and hardware restrictions are a way to enforce that.

      Also keep in mind that normal XP is also being retired (sales are ending) at the end of this month, MS doesn't want XP selling for so long that it's still in use in 2014 when long-term support ends, which might happen if it could be slapped on new high-powered computers after their cut-off date. This also spirals off in to the point that MS wants to retire XP sooner than later for API and security reasons.

    6. Re:Microsoft as Hardware Cop? by zoward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Anybody have any idea why Microsoft would want to limit the amount of HDD space on a machine? They want Vista on all larger machines. The only reason they (reluctantly) extended the life of XP was to have something to put on a UMPC-class machine to prevent Linux from becoming the de facto standard OS for that entire class of PC's. To prevent PC builders from using this as a loophole to keep pre-installing XP on full-blown PC's, they're limiting the HD size on which it can be installed. I expect this to change once UMPC's start shipping with >80GB HDD's though.
      --
      "Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?"
    7. Re:Microsoft as Hardware Cop? by Jellybob · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Windows XP is now only available for UMPCs, and other low-spec machines that can't run Vista.

      Presumably Microsoft's idea of a low-spec machine is something with 80GB of hard disk space, which is why they won't sell it to go on machines with more.

  5. Doh, I just order the EEE PC 20g last night. by y86 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Looks like I paid top dollar for old tech.

    All well, it still looks cool.

  6. Re:Me too! by somersault · · Score: 4, Funny

    This should make these computers have batteries that last forever For certain subsets of forever, that is indeed true!
    --
    which is totally what she said
  7. Re:Me too! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Informative
    The Pentium M isn't exactly the P3 architecture. It incorporates the branch predictor from the P4 (much improved over the P3, since the long pipeline in the P4 made branch miss-predictions incredibly expensive) and a few other things. The Core 1 was a modified Pentium M, and the Core 2 is a completely new microarchitecture, incorporating a lot of things not in the Pentium M (64-bit mode, SSE4, micro-op fusion, and so on).

    The Atom is closest to the Pentium MMX than any other Intel CPU. It is in-order, for one thing, while every other Intel chip since the Pentium Pro has been out-of-order. It supports SMT, making it fairly unique among Intel chips (only the P4 did this before, and it has almost nothing else in common with the Atom), which helps avoid pipeline stalls caused by the lack of instruction re-ordering.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  8. Re:Me too! by gad_zuki! · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I believe the MSI Wind will eventually roll-out with some 3G card. There was a prototype earlier. Not sure which/when. Just keep a look out at gadget sites.

  9. Long live battery life by Lupu · · Score: 5, Informative

    While the Atom certainly delivers impressive power statistics compared to our typical laptop processors, they are still far from the level of the ARM family. A recent article on Ars Technica will explain why. ARM processors are by far the most common processor on the low power frontier and the reason seems apparent; even at 1GHz they claim to reach operational power consumption around 300mW. Now, granted, it is on a RISC instruction set, but their upcoming Cortex-A9 will support multicore and starts to sound like a very interesting alternative for a notebook processor.

    Could someone drop me a message as soon as those things start entering the market?

  10. Re:Small Server by thanatos_x · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Probably because...

    1. There is a correlation between seniority and intelligence/common sense in many things. There may and can be outliers. Out of 99,999 users, you'd be bound to find a few trolls.
    2. More likely it's because the poster seems to not care at all about a tiny 2W processor with reasonable performance. It's a fairly big step, but his choice of wording suggests he's completely... indignant.

    "Car manufacturer comes out with car that gets 230 mpg"

    Pfft. I'll care when they do that and give me a nice 0-60 time and 120 top speed. Oh, and when they seat 4 people.
    OR
    That's impressive, but the real test will be to see if they can make the vehicle usable, maintaining enough appeal to overcome American bias to large, powerful cars.

    They say the same things, but there's a world of difference between how they come off.

    --
    I am not an expert. If I am misled in something, please correct me.
  11. Re:Small Server by lysdexia · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's the problem with young geeks these days. No respect for their elders. What with their "pwned" and their "kthxbye" and their fancy-dan slidey-outie phones, why some of them barely have guts! And their beards! Little whispy things ... Makes me want to bust the keyboard off my Kaypro and come out swingin'! Just be glad papaw had his adderall this morning.

  12. Re:Small Server by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wow, I didn't know there were any 3-digiters left alive. Since there's only a few WWI vets left, I figured you were all long since dead.

  13. Re:So, if I read that right by confused+one · · Score: 4, Informative

    OK, So I checked and to get a closer comparison of two new chips (the C7 is several years old now), Intel Atom (45nm) vs Via Nano (65nm).

    Atom = 4 W.

    Nano = 17W.

    Keep in mind that the C7 has been shown to be faster than the Atom, and the Nano is twice as fast as the C7. On a performance/watt basis that puts Nano much closer to the Atom than even I thought.

  14. Transmeta - Crusoe by kcdoodle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hey, Intel is beating Transmeta at their own game.

    You remember Transmeta. Linus worked there. Stock started out around $20/share. I bought $4000 worth. The darn thing tanked, reverse split, and tanked some more. I have about $35 worth of this company now. Yep, rode it all the way down.

    But now that Intel is making a realllllly low power processor, it is big news. I hope Transmeta gets some new orders because of this.

    Oh yeah, Transmeta claims about a dozen or patents have been infringed upon by Intel in the production of this chip. So we just might have a new SCO. (At least I never bought any SCO stock.)

    --

    - I live the greatest adventure anyone could possibly desire. - Tosk the Hunted
  15. Re:Me too! by Lemming+Mark · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'd like to note that aside from the Core series of chips actually developing in terms of the microarchitecture, rather than just process shrinking an old design, the Atom is an all-new core from the ground up. It's a very different microarchitecture from the Core 2.