backtop


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

Core Solo > Sempron
By maroon1 on 5/31/2007 3:12:52 PM , Rating: -1
What a joke !!!

Intel already have 5.5w core solo and it beats this sempron
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/display/200604...

And Core 2 Duo (ultra-low-voltage) consume only 10w and it's an good performer.

As usual, AMD always produce horrible products.




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
quote:
agreed. Isn't Intel's TDP calculation an average consumption/release while AMD is closer to what might be considered a max?

No:

http://www.behardware.com/medias/photos_news/00/19...


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:

http://www.behardware.com/articles/657-2/amd-athlo...


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
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/05/04/which_is_th...

"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.

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2007q2/core2-qx6...


"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki

Related Articles













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