For those of you interested, the Atom CPU really DOES use just about 4 watts at load. The 60 watts number is for the entire system including power supply, motherboard, DVD-ROM, hard drive, etc. Idle power on both of these parts is measured in milli-watts so you can see how much power each uses under load by looking at the power consumption graphs on page 8:
The gap between rest (on the far left) and load (middle) is much greater for the VIA Nano processor than the Intel Atom - in fact you can barely tell the Atom processor has changed wattage at all.
All of Intel's quad-core processors are actually a pair of dual core dies on one chip. So if one core is bad, they make a single core CPU out of it maybe, or if they do just toss it, they are losing much less wasted silicon.
AMD has traditionally had a much more stable platform than Intel...
S939 was around a long time.
AM2, AM2+ are compatible.
Intel has had just LGA775 long time - but with all the new processor release new power requirements forced new motherboards to be purchased / manufactured anyway.
For someone that goes through a LOT of motherboards, I still give AMD the edge here.
I don't agree with this: it was AMD that led Intel into the world of on-die memory controllers as well as removing the front side bus from PC architecture.
This is great information and makes perfect sense. I have been more than impressed with my use of the Pantone huey PRO that has an ambient light sensor, sits near you monitor, and adjusts your display brightness based on the lighting around you. For my eyes, it was well worth the cost.
There are some valid points here, but the on-board NICs on modern motherboards are just a fast and latency free (if not more so since this one runs on the PCIe bus) that most external NICs.
Yep, that's one of the things that got me excited about it as well. Did you also read this article on ray tracing on the same pcper.com site by a German guy that made a Quake 4 ray tracing engine?
My apologies, I now see what you are saying. These tests were only run with stereo speakers, so that explains why I didn't notice any problems. Will be fixed from now on!
This review looks at gaming and such too, but also touches on the NVIDIA CUDA (Compute Unified Device Architecture), that NVIDIA is hoping will get super computing into mainstream pricing. What thermal dynamics programmer would love to access 128 1.35 GHz processors for $600?
Slashdot Mirror
Another non-slashdotted look can be found here:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=616&type=expert
More good analysis here:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=602
This is a highly unlikely move for NVIDIA. Check out this article for good info on why not:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=601
Maybe out in 5 years, but not anytime soon.
Yeah, sorry, that's been changed.
"For our MP3 encoding test, the VIA Nano processor used a total of 37,323 watt-seconds (Joules) of energy"
Better?
For those of you interested, the Atom CPU really DOES use just about 4 watts at load. The 60 watts number is for the entire system including power supply, motherboard, DVD-ROM, hard drive, etc. Idle power on both of these parts is measured in milli-watts so you can see how much power each uses under load by looking at the power consumption graphs on page 8:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=597&type=expert&pid=8
The gap between rest (on the far left) and load (middle) is much greater for the VIA Nano processor than the Intel Atom - in fact you can barely tell the Atom processor has changed wattage at all.
Pretty good read; interesting that this guy is talking to press a lot more:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=530
Must be part of the "attack Intel" strategy?
All of Intel's quad-core processors are actually a pair of dual core dies on one chip. So if one core is bad, they make a single core CPU out of it maybe, or if they do just toss it, they are losing much less wasted silicon.
A couple more reviews that aren't as, um, positive:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?type=expert&aid=550&pid=2
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/14606
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/04/23/amd_phenom_x3_8750/1
Some of the other reviews to check out:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?type=expert&aid=548&pid=2
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/14583
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/the_new_fastest_hard_drive_ever
AMD has traditionally had a much more stable platform than Intel...
S939 was around a long time.
AM2, AM2+ are compatible.
Intel has had just LGA775 long time - but with all the new processor release new power requirements forced new motherboards to be purchased / manufactured anyway.
For someone that goes through a LOT of motherboards, I still give AMD the edge here.
Yeah, I forgot about 64-bit - another instance in which Intel was lacking.
And in truth, AMD APPEARS to be ahead in the move to fusing a CPU and GPU architecture into something new.
I don't agree with this: it was AMD that led Intel into the world of on-die memory controllers as well as removing the front side bus from PC architecture.
Guilty as charged as well, here. I am absolutely not an AMD shareholder. Nor do I own anything in Intel or NVIDIA.
This is great information and makes perfect sense. I have been more than impressed with my use of the Pantone huey PRO that has an ambient light sensor, sits near you monitor, and adjusts your display brightness based on the lighting around you. For my eyes, it was well worth the cost.
http://www.pantone.com/pages/products/product.aspx?pid=562&ca=2
This is very obviously a lie or joke for early April fools. I didn't know Slashdot fell for them. Did anyone actually read the last page?
You can also see the validity of, but debate around, Larrabee here in an interview with John Carmack: http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/03/12/1918250&from=rss
There are some other good looks at RS780 performance:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=527 - looks at Hybrid CrossFire with several games in real world testing as well as GPU overclocking; also features the new AMD X2 4850e processor
http://www.techwarelabs.com/reviews/processors/780g-and-4850e/ - looks at both the chipset and CPU
http://techreport.com/articles.x/14261 - good motherboard review
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/03/04/amd_780g_integrated_graphics_chipset/1 - tests HQV and HD audio systems
Here are some links to other interesting reviews of these products:
3 92 tested under Vista 64-bit and shows the 8600 GTS behind the aging ATI X1950 ProM yNCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA== tested under XP and shows better performance on the 8600 GTS
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?type=expert&aid=
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MT
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=8409 tested under XP but not a lot of newer games
There are some valid points here, but the on-board NICs on modern motherboards are just a fast and latency free (if not more so since this one runs on the PCIe bus) that most external NICs.
Yep, that's one of the things that got me excited about it as well. Did you also read this article on ray tracing on the same pcper.com site by a German guy that made a Quake 4 ray tracing engine?
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=334
My apologies, I now see what you are saying. These tests were only run with stereo speakers, so that explains why I didn't notice any problems. Will be fixed from now on!
Sounds was just fine for me in these games...though only stereo was tested. Where is other wise reported?
Just thought I drop a link to this article that actually looks at current gaming performance on Vista for both NVIDIA and ATI:
3 54&pid=2
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?type=expert&aid=
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?type=expert&aid=3 19
e rt&pid=5
This review looks at gaming and such too, but also touches on the NVIDIA CUDA (Compute Unified Device Architecture), that NVIDIA is hoping will get super computing into mainstream pricing. What thermal dynamics programmer would love to access 128 1.35 GHz processors for $600?
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=319&type=exp
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?type=expert&aid=2 87
Here the review talks up the signle X1950 XTX card but finds the CrossFire platfrom from ATI still very under-developed.