Slashdot Mirror


Blurring Lines — Dual Core Atom To Lift Netbooks

CWmike writes "'The next innovation coming to Atom is on dual-core,' Intel CEO Paul Otellini said recently of the company's low-end chips, which delivered the modern netbook but also found their way into embedded devices, and in the future, into mobile devices like smartphones. His statement comes after close to two years of accelerated growth, and with the initial euphoria around netbooks now subsiding. HP has already advertised a new netbook, the Hewlett-Packard Mini 210, running Intel's upcoming N455 chip, one of the Atom-series processors, on Amazon.de. The N455 supports DDR3 memory, an upgrade over the DDR2 memory in most netbooks today. The DDR3-capable processors should allow data to be exchanged faster between the memory and CPU, translating to better overall netbook performance. Prices of laptops have been falling and the days of netbooks being a novelty have disappeared, said Jay Chou, research analyst at IDC. Laptops are bridging the pricing gap with netbooks, while offering better performance. 'You're getting something really attractive in the $600 range for better-performing notebooks,' Chou said. 'The original intended message of letting people expect netbooks to behave differently or less effectively is not really ringing.'"

24 of 204 comments (clear)

  1. Replacments by erick99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think we are looking at netbooks mostly occupying the place of notebooks and notebooks just about completely replacing desktops. I haven't bought a desktop since Feb 2004 but I have bought three notebooks since then (most recently a Dell Studio 17 this past September).

    --
    http://www.busyweather.com/
    1. Re:Replacments by Mortiss · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I would kind of doubt that. The ability to easily swap hardware in a full desktop rig will trump laptops any time. Moreover, desktops usually offer more powerful hardware options.

    2. Re:Replacments by calmofthestorm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Although I agree, it's worth pointing out that in the past ten years laptops have gone from monolithic everything-on-board devices to reasonably pluggable, at least at the larger end. My GIGANTIC desktop replacement from Sager has a desktop motherboard and graphics card (and a battery life of about 10 minutes new).

      My older laptop from Dell I upgraded the gfx card from one laptop form factor card to another. Also laptop ram is pretty interchangeable, except for that nasty shit Apple pulls with the differing electronegativity.

      --
      93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
    3. Re:Replacments by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The ability to easily swap hardware in a full desktop rig will trump laptops any time.

      Yeah, for the enthusiast market. For the general population, swapping computer hardware is on the same level as tweaking the dishwasher for more hot-water spraying action.

    4. Re:Replacments by calmofthestorm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not fitting in the slot or BSDing on boot is kinda mean but it does no permanent damage. The Apple thing not only damages your property but is intended to gradually become less reliable to mislead the customer into thinking that non-Apple RAM is low quality.

      I just got generic ram and it worked fine, by the way. Maybe I got lucky or something, I do think it was kingston. Whatever, I'm a pretty loyal Sager customer now for the big cindreblock desktop replacements and I'll stick to Lenovo Thinkpads for now for the smaller ones, though that may well change based on what I've been hearing about their newer models

      I can't believe I'm defending Dell, it's pretty out of character, but this is one case where it makes sense.

      --
      93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
    5. Re:Replacments by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The ability to easily swap hardware in a full desktop rig will trump laptops any time

      Who cares? Seriously, what percentage of computer owners do you think ever upgrades their computer by any mechanism other than buying a new one?

      Moreover, desktops usually offer more powerful hardware options

      Again, who cares? My three-year-old laptop is still fast enough for everything I need it for (although it could do with more RAM). You do realise that laptop sales past desktop sales a couple of years ago? For most people, convenience is more important than speed. Computers got to the point where they were fast enough for a significant proportion of the market around 10 years ago.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:Replacments by masdog · · Score: 5, Informative

      while most laptops are maxed-out when they come from the factory.

      Since when? Most laptops come with one DIMM of the lowest density RAM they can put in the machine and are easily upgradeable. RAM is one of the only components that can easily be upgrades in almost all laptops except Macs and some Dell Latitude E-series machines since you only have to open a service door or remove the palm rest to upgrade RAM.

      If a screen breaks on a desktop you either drag out that $7 CRT you picked up a few years back at a garage sale or buy a ~$200 or less monitor, or, if you have a good graphics card, just use your HDTV.

      Every laptop has some form of display out (VGA, HDMI, or DisplayPort) that can be used to hook up a monitor, projector, or HDTV (especially one that isn't crippled to 1024x768). The machine is still usable at that point even if you lose portability. Almost every one also has USB and most have bluetooth so you can hook up external devices.

      If your power supply dies on a laptop and the laptop is out of warranty, the laptop is dead. If your power supply dies on your desktop you just throw in a new one.

      LOLWUT??? You realize that there are very few laptops with external power supplies. The AC/DC conversion usually happens in the AC adapter, and it can be replaced by a ~$100 vendor specific or $50 universal AC adapter.

    7. Re:Replacments by frosty_tsm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think we are looking at netbooks mostly occupying the place of notebooks and notebooks just about completely replacing desktops. I haven't bought a desktop since Feb 2004 but I have bought three notebooks since then (most recently a Dell Studio 17 this past September).

      I agree with you mostly for the average consumer. However, users who need more power than a laptop offers (gaming is an obvious one, but software developers too) want the higher power you get with a desktop. In a laptop, you (generally) don't get:

      - very high-end video cards (my new one in my desktop is almost the size of an EEE PC and requires a 500 watt PSU)
      - high IO speeds (generally slower hard drives, lower clock-rate BUS speeds and higher RAM latency; everything is underclocked to conserve energy)
      - mobile CPUs skimp on cache size, which is worse when combined with multi-core.
      - better heat dissipation (they've gotten better, but I know of some recent laptops that overheated to the point of failure).

      There will always be a need for some portion of the market having as much power at their finger tips (even if this group decreases in size over the years due to other innovations).

  2. Computers are a commodity by headkase · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How much more performance do we need before we all say: "enough."? Computers years ago already passed the good-enough mark for normal usage. The only thing that still drives processors are transcoding and games really. Give it another year or two and I'm sure I won't even look at the spec for what processor is in a machine I buy: of course it will be fine. What do you think this will mean for new computer sales? Will people jump off the upgrade treadmill and simply wait until their current machine dies before purchasing a new one? The inflationary days of selling computing hardware may just be over: now we seem to be getting into a saturated sector. What will manufacturers do to replace those sales?

    --
    Shh.
    1. Re:Computers are a commodity by biryokumaru · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, when I watched 100 MB movies (sized for Zip disks, I guess) from DALnet in the mid 90's, the better quality stuff was actually pushing my old system. By the mid 00's, the quality of movies had risen to the point where I doubt they'd play at all on my old system. Now, with 19 GB BD quality flicks out there, my 3 year old AMD 64X2 4200+ is already dropping frames, even with a Radeon 4800 series.

      I really don't expect this practically exponential increase to just magically level off in the next few years, especially with 3D features coming out these days.

      --
      When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
    2. Re:Computers are a commodity by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Will people jump off the upgrade treadmill and simply wait until their current machine dies before purchasing a new one?

      I believe you'll find that 95% of people do that already. I'm still trying to decide how much longer I can live with my 2003-era Windows PC (with 2005 graphics card) before I have to give in and buy another one for gaming, and my laptop is literally dying which is the only reason why I'll replace it in the next year or so.

      The difference that cheaper PCs has made to me is that I buy more of them for specific uses, rather than trying to do everything on one expensive system. Netbooks are a good example of that as people who wouldn't have paid $1000 for a laptop a few years back will pay $300 for a netbook.

    3. Re:Computers are a commodity by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Computers years ago already passed the good-enough mark for normal usage. The only thing that still drives processors are transcoding and games really.

      Don't underestimate the ability of the average computer user to take a nice collection of hardware and crap it up with endless shiny programs. Factor in OS bloat and I think we'll be upgrading for a while yet.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:Computers are a commodity by Draek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How much more performance do we need before we all say: "enough."?

      We already did, that's how netbooks gained such a following in the first place.

      This drive towards bigger drives and more processing power is driven not by consumer demands, but simply due to a marketing need: after all, given the same price most people would opt for a dual-core over a single-core computer, even if they need only one.

      Give it another year or two and I'm sure I won't even look at the spec for what processor is in a machine I buy: of course it will be fine.

      I already am at that point. My current notebook is horribly underpowered compared even to the cheapest netbook out there, yet if it weren't for its deader-than-dead battery it'd still suit me perfectly.

      Though, given the same price, I'd still probably go for this new dual-core CPU over the older, single-core one, in spite of having ample proof of being satisfied with either.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    5. Re:Computers are a commodity by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      1 core for you, 1 core for Norton...

  3. Not a Netbook by slimjim8094 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First netbooks had small screens and awesome battery life. Then they made bigger screens, which used more battery. Then they put in larger and larger spinning hard drives, faster processors, and now dual-core?

    So we go from a tiny, long-lived netbook to a large (and heavy) powerful and short-lived netbook. Also known as a laptop.

    What's next - a high end graphics card so people can play games?

    I have one of the early EeePCs - I think it's the 900A - with a 4GB SSD and a 9 inch screen. It runs for at least 5 hours, and depending on the pants I wear it can fit into a cargo pocket. *That's* a netbook.

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    1. Re:Not a Netbook by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have one of the early EeePCs - I think it's the 900A - with a 4GB SSD and a 9 inch screen. It runs for at least 5 hours, and depending on the pants I wear it can fit into a cargo pocket. *That's* a netbook.

      The EeePC I bought a few months ago has a 100+GB hard drive, 10 or 11 inch screen and runs for at least as long (the battery display claims 9 hours but I don't quite believe it). The only downside is that it barely fits into my jacket pocket, but I couldn't live with a screen any smaller than it has anyway.

      Don't the new dual-core Atom systems use less power than the old single cores?

    2. Re:Not a Netbook by dnaumov · · Score: 3, Informative

      First netbooks had small screens and awesome battery life. Then they made bigger screens, which used more battery. Then they put in larger and larger spinning hard drives, faster processors, and now dual-core?

      So we go from a tiny, long-lived netbook to a large (and heavy) powerful and short-lived netbook. Also known as a laptop.

      What's next - a high end graphics card so people can play games?

      I have one of the early EeePCs - I think it's the 900A - with a 4GB SSD and a 9 inch screen. It runs for at least 5 hours, and depending on the pants I wear it can fit into a cargo pocket. *That's* a netbook.

      Since when is a 5 hour battery time in any way impressive? You do realize there are a lot of notebooks out there with 8-12h battery time?

    3. Re:Not a Netbook by znerk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I want something $200 that can browse the full web

      Part of the problem here would be that "the full web" includes things like flash - which can bring a reasonably decent machine to its knees without too much effort. Flash games, such as those made by Zynga (think Cafe World and Farmville) are especially heinous in this regard - I've seen 60% CPU usage and 0.5GB RAM sucked up by a single instance of firefox (with a single tab/window) running their bloated, poorly-coded flash games. This was on a machine that, while not top-of-the-line, is quite adequate for pushing World of Warcraft at a playable framerate (even in Dalaran, instances, and battlegrounds, for those of you for whom this metric will mean anything).

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
  4. Along the same lines... by FlyByPC · · Score: 3, Funny

    Next, they plan to release a dual-engine moped.

    --
    Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
  5. Dual core Atoms came out in Sept 2008 by idealego · · Score: 4, Informative

    What this article should say is that new lower-power dual-core Atoms are about to be released.

    1. Re:Dual core Atoms came out in Sept 2008 by rwa2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I approve. I've been testing a dual-core nVidia ION setup for use as a thin-client at work, and it's worlds apart from my eeepc 901 netbook at home. It's almost indistinguishable from a real desktop unless I run FPU-intensive apps on it.

      The Atom 330 runs 64-bit code, the dual cores keep it from stuttering and pausing like my eeepc, and the nVidia GPU make it perform well on movies and light 3D, whereas the Intel GPU has lots of artifacts and is slow under Linux (and the newer pinetrail cores use the crappy PowerVR GMA500 chipsets that aren't supported under most Linux distros unless you manage to shoehorn in the one binary blob driver thy occasionally release for a particular version of ubuntu),

      I'm waiting for ION2 nettops to come out, and then I'm planning on using one to replace my 24x7 home Linux server. I think this is the real market for these devices, small nettops and netbooks that you can just drop in anywhere for $200 - $400 to do one specific task and just forget about. There will always be a "real" computer somewhere in the house for gaming or heavy-duty web browsing or whatever, but most households will only buy 1 every few years. These cheap devices are at a price point where people say "yeah, I could throw one in the car to use as a large-screen GPS" or "I could put one behind the TV so it could play movies and show photo screensavers".

      Once they reach the $50 - $100 range, they'll sell even more, since people could start buying them as presents, and you'd have a lot of useless stuff left around. I wish the older Palm Pilots were here already, it would be great to have little touchscreens lying around everywhere to use as remote controls or music players or something :-/

    2. Re:Dual core Atoms came out in Sept 2008 by kenh · · Score: 3, Informative

      Atoms are (and always have been) low-power, it was the chipset that caused problems. Using older 945 chipset caused power/heat to rise, the new low-power chipsets have been out for months now, as shown on boards like the D510MO mini-ITX board from Intel.

      --
      Ken
  6. Multiple factual errors and dubious statements... by tjrw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As others have already mentioned, dual-core Atom processors have been out for 2 years, so a dual-core Atom is nothing new.

    As regards the support of DDR3 memory, it's unlikely to make any measurable performance difference over DDR2 given the relatively anaemic CPU performance of the Atom. The reason is far more prosaic. DDR3 is now cheaper than DDR2 and that trend will continue so Intel are doing the right thing in moving the chipset support over to the less expensive memory. In a budget platform anything else would be foolish.

  7. netbooks became laptops by DaveGod · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Barely had the netbook started hitting the mainstream that they were getting bigger screens, bigger drives, more weight, less battery life, bigger price tag. Most of them very quickly became just crap laptops.

    Most of them are seem terrible value. For around 10%-15% more you can get something that at least holds itself to the standard of a low-end laptop, with a much more powerful type of "1.6ghz cpu" and other components yet after a few months the battery life is practically the same. The weight is for all intents and purposes very similar.

    Netbooks were good because they were less than two-thirds the price of a laptop, were far more portable (could be forgotten about in a basic satchel), had long batteries. While the spec looked low, general use was actually snappy because it was using SSD and a light OS. You only noticed the performance loss when doing things that actually required decent horsepower (though choppy flash video was a bit of a weakness), which wasn't something you'd want a netbook for anyway.

    The summary suggests laptops became cheaper to bridge the gap between them and netbooks. I think it was much more than netbooks turned into laptops.