backtop


Print 53 comment(s) - last by foolsgambit11.. on Sep 11 at 3:54 PM

AMD is aiming for markets looking for more performance than the Intel Atom

AMD is hard at work introducing new processors to try to capture market share from Intel. Earlier this week, slides showing some new AMD processors coming this year surfaced. Among the new processors on the slide was a line AMD is calling Ultra-Value Client (UVC).

The UVC processors will be available through OEMs only. More information on the line of UVC processors has now surfaced at CHW.net. The new slides show that the UVC processors are intended to allow OEMs to produce new computers in form factors optimized for emerging markets and basic PC usage.

AMD does specify that the UVC products are aimed at more than the netbook market and can deliver traditional PC performance. The UVC processors are intended to be paired with AMD's 690 and 740 chipsets for high-quality visuals.

All UVC parts will use AMD's standard socket AM2 and S1g1 notebook infrastructures. The UVC processors include the AMD Athlon X2 3250e with a 22W TDP and operating at 1.5GHz. It features a 1MB L2 cache and is planned to be available in Q4 2008.

The AMD Athlon 2650e has a 15W TDP and operates at 1.6GHz with 512KB cache. The 2650e is available now. According to AMD slides, it is positioning both the Athlon X2 3250e and Athlon 2650e above the Intel Atom DT 230 processor in performance.

These processors may become attractive to netbook makers looking for an alternative to Intel's Atom parts because of the current shortages of Atom parts from Intel. It is important to note that the AMD processors use more power than Intel's Atom. AMD is betting some users and OEMs will be willing to sacrifice battery life for improved performance.



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Rock Atom
By Natfly on 9/10/2008 12:58:58 PM , Rating: 4
I think the Atom is good for what it does and its power consumption. Unfortunately it's tied to that abomination the 945 chipset.


RE: Rock Atom
By therealnickdanger on 9/10/2008 1:22:39 PM , Rating: 3
945 is really what is holding back Atom. It's too bad, really. However, a fresh line of Poulsbo netbooks is on the horizon though. From the AT review of the Dell Mini:

"I asked Dell why it opted against Poulsbo and I was told that it was a timing issue - in order to have the Inspiron Mini out today, the design had to be completed using 945G."

I don't know if or when such a beast will arrive, but a netbook with a dual-core Atom w/HT combined with Poulsbo and a real SSD would be remarkable. I realize netbooks aren't "supposed" to be powerful or expensive, but I really don't care. :P


RE: Rock Atom
By sprockkets on 9/10/2008 2:58:50 PM , Rating: 1
Really? Cause the D201GLY2A board with a 1.2ghz Celeron based on C2D technology whips the Atom in both performance AND power efficiency, and costs about $15 less to boot.


RE: Rock Atom
By Natfly on 9/11/2008 9:43:30 AM , Rating: 2
The Celeron 220? It has a TDP of 19 watts, not even in the same realm as the atom's 2-4 watt tdp.


RE: Rock Atom
By Penti on 9/11/2008 12:37:05 PM , Rating: 2
Still competes against the VIAs.

Anyhow i wish that they had came out with the dual-core Atom from the start.


RE: Rock Atom
By Natfly on 9/11/2008 1:50:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Still competes against the VIAs.


I agree, I'm not saying that the Celeron 220 is a bad chip or that it's not competitive. Just that the Atom itself does well for consuming so little power.


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki