Print 40 comment(s) - last by Goty.. on Jun 1 at 11:35 AM

New Sempron for Socket S1 embedded and SBC systems

AMD today announced the latest addition to the embedded product lineup, the Sempron 2100+ processor. The new Sempron 2100+ has a thermal design power rating of nine watts. With the low TDP rating, the Sempron 2100+ is ideal for fan-less embedded systems.

AMD packages the Sempron 2100+ in a Socket S1 package. The Sempron 2100+ is compatible with the AMD M690T chipset. The new Sempron 2100+ is the first embedded targeted processor from AMD to feature AMD64 technology.

“By expanding our product portfolio with this new, very low power version of the highly successful AMD Sempron processor and extending the temperature support in our Geode line, AMD is delivering on our promise of customer-centric innovation for a range of embedded markets,” Embedded Computing Solutions Division Vice President Greg White said. “You will continue to see AMD offer our embedded customers the products and tools they need to get high performance, very low power products to market quickly.”

Expect the Sempron 2100+ to make its way into embedded and SBCs. AAEON and Arbor offer boards compatible with the new processor.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By darkpaw on 5/31/2007 1:54:27 PM , Rating: 3
Really can't wait till they actually have a real x86 processor that is able to be used in ultrasmall devices like a PDA or Phone.

I would love to be able to play old dos games on a handheld. They really don't have the horsepower for emulation, but if no emulation was needed it'd be pretty sweet.

RE: wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By KristopherKubicki on 5/31/2007 1:57:19 PM , Rating: 2
I think the most power hungry OMAP PDA processors are in the area of 300 milliwatts. Long way to go on x86 still!

RE: wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By KristopherKubicki on 5/31/2007 1:58:03 PM , Rating: 1
Double post on my own site :( Failtrain.

RE: wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By TomZ on 5/31/2007 2:12:43 PM , Rating: 1
It seems like the site is designed to prevent double posts, but it doesn't always work.

By jpeyton on 6/1/2007 1:47:42 AM , Rating: 2
Intel needs better idle power management options for their desktop and server CPUs.

The reason AMD CPUs consume less power at idle/low usage (which is the state most computers worldwide spend their CPU cycles) is because they can power down to a significantly lower clock speed at a lower voltage. AMD desktop CPUs can lower their clock speed to 1GHz at .8v-.9v VCore. Intel's Core 2 CPUs can only clock down to 1.6GHz at 1.0-1.1v VCore.

Intel should just adopt the low power states from their laptop CPUs for their desktop line.

RE: wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By Googer on 5/31/2007 2:00:38 PM , Rating: 2
But this 9 watt processor should really give Transmeta's line of low wattage processors a run for their money.

(I know they have a new parent company)

By darkpaw on 5/31/2007 2:15:43 PM , Rating: 2
Yah, sadly it'll be a long way. I think when it finally does happen though there will be a much larger choice of software on the handhelds.

RE: wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By smitty3268 on 5/31/2007 3:03:47 PM , Rating: 3
The AMD Geode is x86 and down to .8W. Of course it wouldn't be nearly as powerful as this chip.

By darkpaw on 5/31/2007 3:34:40 PM , Rating: 2
I just saw that in the linked press release..

Makes me wonder what I could do with one of those. I haven't actually built anything like a small computer manually since college (much love for PICs back then).

RE: wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By KristopherKubicki on 5/31/07, Rating: -1
RE: wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By johnsonx on 5/31/07, Rating: 0
RE: wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By bdot on 5/31/2007 5:09:26 PM , Rating: 2
If you read above he already caught it himself. Stop flaming.

RE: wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By johnsonx on 5/31/07, Rating: 0
By Gul Westfale on 5/31/2007 9:03:18 PM , Rating: 2
i think johnson was being sarcastic...


RE: wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By hoyanf on 5/31/2007 4:12:13 PM , Rating: 2
I guess you'd hav to be a lil upset as you wont be getting x86 processor but x86 and x64 processor for embedded design... How bout that...

RE: wtb PDA/phone with x86 processor
By Fox5 on 5/31/2007 4:21:10 PM , Rating: 2
Dosbox .70 is available for pxa270 based handhelds (ie, dell axim x51) and is supposed to have decent performance. On the other hand, I don't know how to extract an ipk file...might only be the source code that's available?

Somewhat Impressive
By Egglick on 5/31/2007 2:32:39 PM , Rating: 3
9 watts is pretty damn good, considering VIA's C7 is rated at 12, 15, and 20 watts, depending on the speed. I'm sure this Sempron is substantially more powerful, even though it's likely clocked several hundred Mhz lower (I'd guess between 1.1 and 1.3Ghz).

Anyone able to find an official clockspeed or amount of cache?

RE: Somewhat Impressive
By psychobriggsy on 5/31/2007 2:39:51 PM , Rating: 2

Probably faster than a 2GHz C7 though, except at things the C7 has dedicated hardware for like security.

RE: Somewhat Impressive
By fic2 on 5/31/2007 6:02:21 PM , Rating: 2
I wish they would do it in a 939 package. I could swap out my mythTV processor (939 sempron 3400) and not have any fans. Would be sweet.

RE: Somewhat Impressive
By jajig on 5/31/2007 11:14:50 PM , Rating: 2
Why not just underclock and undervolt it and see how much heat it generates? You might be surprised by how cool it runs.

I have my sempron socket 754 down at 1Ghz and 1.1V and it barely gets above ambient temperature. To be fair it does have a slow fan on it.

AMD could give VIA a run for its money
By Zirconium on 5/31/2007 2:02:12 PM , Rating: 5
I would much rather have a nano-ITX system with a Sempron 2100+ and the integrated X1250 graphics than a Cyrix processor with Unichrome graphics. I believe that the integrated graphics on the 690-series boards have H.264 acceleration, so it might be possible to build an Apple TV killer if someone releases a small enough board.

By Spoelie on 5/31/2007 5:24:22 PM , Rating: 2
I would have to disappoint you on that h.264 part.. Tho the next iteration should have it. But your proposition sounds sweet indeed..

TDP = Thermal Design Power/Point
By soydios on 5/31/2007 2:08:29 PM , Rating: 2
Correction: Thermal DESIGN Point, not data point

RE: TDP = Thermal Design Power/Point
By Goty on 5/31/07, Rating: 0
RE: TDP = Thermal Design Power/Point
By ergle on 5/31/2007 7:43:13 PM , Rating: 5

From the article you link to:
The Thermal Design Power (TDP) (sometimes called Thermal Design Point )

You might want to read the material you link to -- as might all those who rated your post up...

RE: TDP = Thermal Design Power/Point
By Goty on 6/1/07, Rating: 0
By osalcido on 5/31/2007 2:18:04 PM , Rating: 2
And pair it with the same LCD screen technology.... which happens to suck up around half the juice of any mobile device.

Socket Am2 would be nice
By electriple9 on 5/31/2007 5:00:07 PM , Rating: 2
This would be a nice cpu for a low power, low noise am2 system.

Core Solo > Sempron
By maroon1 on 5/31/07, Rating: -1
RE: Core Solo > Sempron
By Comdrpopnfresh on 5/31/2007 3:31:19 PM , Rating: 5
yeh, that bout of years where the AMD64 spanked anything netburst was a complete showing of their horrible products...

look how much those chips cost from intel! These are semprons, and will most likely be a lot less expensive. Plus it is even more impressive when thinking these chips are worked off of a very old architecture (vs core).

RE: Core Solo > Sempron
By darkpaw on 5/31/2007 3:33:18 PM , Rating: 3
The price on those Intel chips is pretty insane too. Anyone have the price on these new Semprons or the geodes? I didn't see them in the press release.

RE: Core Solo > Sempron
By Spoelie on 5/31/2007 5:29:08 PM , Rating: 2
TDP between the 2 companies is not directly comparable at all. Stick both of them in a system that is configured as close as possible and compare total system power draw for a true comparison.

RE: Core Solo > Sempron
By Comdrpopnfresh on 5/31/2007 5:41:53 PM , Rating: 2
agreed. Isn't Intel's TDP calculation an average consumption/release while AMD is closer to what might be considered a max? I remember reading about that when the first A64s came out, because that made their performance:power ratio that much stronger in comparison w/ Intel's offerings.

Plus the tdp on AMDs chips also represents the memory controller for the system, whereas with Intel that is separate (I suppose that would make a comparable Intel system eat a little bit more power & give off more heat). Though I do think the geodes do not have an integrated north bridge. Is that correct?

RE: Core Solo > Sempron
By Accord99 on 5/31/2007 6:03:52 PM , Rating: 1
agreed. Isn't Intel's TDP calculation an average consumption/release while AMD is closer to what might be considered a max?


RE: Core Solo > Sempron
By Comdrpopnfresh on 5/31/2007 6:16:38 PM , Rating: 2
link's bad

RE: Core Solo > Sempron
By Accord99 on 5/31/2007 6:42:07 PM , Rating: 2
Works for me. Here's the link to the actual page:

RE: Core Solo > Sempron
By psychobriggsy on 5/31/2007 7:08:53 PM , Rating: 2
So AMD's highest end CPUs can consume near their max TDP. Woo.

Otherwise for the past few years all their other CPUs have been consuming way below the TDP they were selling at, with the exception of some 25W Turions / Turion X2s.

Dunno about this one, 9W is very low, even at 1GHz. However the 9W will be a worst case scenario - if this thing has power saving modes it probably has a far low average power consumption.

RE: Core Solo > Sempron
By gescom on 5/31/2007 8:52:03 PM , Rating: 2

"The results are impressive: although AMD's Athlon 64 X2 5600+ is a 90 nm part rated at 89 W, and the Core 2 Duo E6400 is a modern 65 nm product rated at 65 W, the AMD system required clearly less energy over a period of 60 or 90 minutes."

What a Joke!
As usual, Intel always produce horrible products.

RE: Core Solo > Sempron
By Gul Westfale on 5/31/2007 9:10:41 PM , Rating: 2
well not always, but they have been exaggerating their TDPs in a way. i remember when i bought my first A64, a 3000+ socket 754, and the TDP was given as 89W. however the top of the line chip at the time , the 3400+ was also rated as 89W. thus the 3000+s max TDP must have been way below 89W.

so i'm guessing AMD gives one rating for a whole family of products, maybe to make it easier on motherboard manufacturers to build boards capable of handling future chips? intel wouldn't intentionally make it harder on mobo manufacturers by misstating their numbers... so what gives?

also, as far as the toms link is concerned, two things must be kept in mind:

1. this is toms we are talking about
2. see above.

it would be nice to get some kind of official explanation from a third party, like a mobo vendor.

RE: Core Solo > Sempron
By Accord99 on 5/31/2007 9:28:48 PM , Rating: 2
System power dissipation also depends on the choice of components. Here, Techreport finds the quad-core QX6800 using 1W more power at idle than a X2 6000+, and 16W less at load.

"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer
Related Articles

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki