AMD Athlon 64 2000+ 1GHz to compete with Intel Atom

[Andreas G]

AMD has a K8-based low-energy processor in the works. We've seen more than few traces of that from time to time, but everything still points to that this little being won't arrive until next year. In the mean time, it seems like AMD has created a new niche product by taking its existing K8 architecture and simply downclock it. THG has gotten their hands on an AMD Athlon 64 2000+, which operates at only 1GHz and draws a maximum of 8W, according to AMD.

The processor is based on the lesser known Lima core with G0 stepping. The HyperTransport bus has been reduced to only 1GHz. At 8W it is still twice as hungry as Intel's Atom processor, but AMD has the upper hand on the chipset side. In the review they compared AMD's critically acclaimed 780G chipset to Intel's 945G circuit and it's a technological knock-out.

AMD 780G uses a fraction of the power, while offering tons of features lacking in the 945G chipset. The only drawback so far is that there are few boards smaller than mATX with 780G, while Intel has Atom platforms at both miniITX and miniDTX standards. Unlike Atom, the AMD processor is not fused to the board which does make it a bit more flexible although the in the end it will end up costing you more.

Even though the AMD processor has a TDP of 8W and the Atom 4W, the AMD processor remained a lot cooler and worked just fine with passive cooling, which is not something you could say about the Atom platform. The actual power consumption also proved to be better with the AMD processor, just like the overall performance. It would have been nice to see how VIA Nano would measure up to AMD Athlon 64 2000+, but unfortunately the article focuses on Intel vs. AMD, VIA was left out.

 :: Athlon Vs. Atom: Duel Of The Energy Savers

[fackamato]

I get the feeling that Intel saw these mini PCs (EEE PC etc) coming, and felt a sudden urge to release a processor aimed at that market, and did so without really thinking... I mean, the A64 really kicks its ass, in every possible way. And don't even mention the chipsets... ugh! I feel sorry for Intel Atom. BTW, I wonder how this Lima overclocks..
_________________
Open Source > *

[Delph1]

With a locked 5x multiplier ... don't think so

//Andreas
_________________
"I'm sort of a postmodern vegetarian, I eat meat ironically"
"You are our Swedish superhero "

Forget everything, knowledge is your enemy, it's only going to make you second-guess yourself."

[fackamato]

[Delph1]

Yah, go 100% overclock \o/

/Andreas
_________________
"I'm sort of a postmodern vegetarian, I eat meat ironically"
"You are our Swedish superhero "

Forget everything, knowledge is your enemy, it's only going to make you second-guess yourself."

[nvidiaamd]

Im glad to see that AMD is heading in this direction aswell, their absense in this part of the market is quite obvious. But is it faster than the VIA Nano or does it go somewhere inbetween the Atom and the Nano?
_________________
E6750 @ 3500 MHz 24/7 ~ P35-DS4 rev2 ~ 2GB PC6400 Cas4 ~ 500W FSP Bluestorm II

[alur]

It would be cool if the multiplier wasn't locked at 5x, that way you could(even software wise) implement a turbo button! After all, the CPU should support much higher frequencies

[Delph1]

Ohhh, Turbo button! Now that brings back memories

//Andreas
_________________
"I'm sort of a postmodern vegetarian, I eat meat ironically"
"You are our Swedish superhero "

Forget everything, knowledge is your enemy, it's only going to make you second-guess yourself."

[nvidiaamd]

[KTE]

Well, both Intel/AMD saw the market booming and now that they are on more efficient and matured processes they can obviously cheaply produce low watt CPUs to make large profits on excellent yields. AMDs 65nm is without a doubt very strong in energy and yields by now and although Intels 45nm won't be near in terms of process maturity, the EE factor is already very high due to high-k. It's only natural that they were to release such models.

AMDs release seems just to be a quick counter-attack because its real planned low-watt CPU isn't coming till Q4 08 era, 1W-10W Bobcat.

I am still surprised and think it was a very clever move for AMD. Going from TDP, their 65nm SOI is 6.55*10e-8 Watts/Transistor whilst Intels 45nm hi-k Si is 8.51*10e-8 Watts/Transistor - thats 30% more efficient for AMD.

They made a slight mistake. 780G is 10W TDP, 8W average whilst the SB is 1.4W TDP and 0.8W average. They obviously put the complete package TDP under NB.

[Delph1]

True, but it's still way better than what Intel has to offer

//Andreas
_________________
"I'm sort of a postmodern vegetarian, I eat meat ironically"
"You are our Swedish superhero "

Forget everything, knowledge is your enemy, it's only going to make you second-guess yourself."