With the extra bits put onto this Atom that it will beable to handle true HD (or 1080p)? That is what I am really intrested in, as I belive there is no current Atom based device that does, or not with out an external graphics card which sort makes 'system on a chip' pointless.
< Its not a hand grenade, its a pin holding device.
The competition next year will be 40nm dual core 800MHz Cortex-A9 using 0.5W (in total, not per core). Current Atoms need 2-4W per core. Let's see whether Intel can do less than 1W with one core close to 1GHz - now that would be an achievement.
@Wilco 1: In addition the Cortex-A9 has higher performance per clock than the Atom, so the Atom will really need its Burst Performance Mode hackery to compete. In addition I am not convinced that Intel knows what a mobile SoC should be - i.e., a single chip (maybe a MCM for the RAM, like the iPhone) that incorporates all of the application processor needs.
I assume the article means "brick with a screen and phone" when it writes "high-end smartphone" in relation to Atom?
To be fair to Atom, I expect the next generation 800MHz Atom to use less power than the current generation, and to be far more aggressive (like a badger) in idle. The generation after (on 22nm) will be the one to look out for, that will be up against 28nm ARM Cortex A9s I expect.
When I were a lad, 'overclocking' meant pushing a chip above and beyond what it was warranted for by the manufacturer, sometimes beyond the bounds of stability.
Are we now saying that Intel are shipping chips which may not work at top speed, which may even be unstable? If not, where's the overclocking? I realise that most Windows systems wouldn't notice hardware instability if it hit them in the face, they'd usually quite rightly blame the OS, but users of phones based on something other than Windows Mobile might care.
Intel Core i7 I7-920 Quad Core Processor (2.66GHz, 4x256kB, 4.8GT/s QPI, LGA 1336 Socket B)
AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition Quad Core Processor (3.4GHz, 6MB L3 Cache, 4x512KB L2 Cache, 2000 MHz Bus, Socket AM3)
Asus P7P55D Motherboard (Intel Socket H LGA1156, P55 Express, ATX, 16GB DDR3)
Intel Core i5 750 Qaud Core Processor (2.66GHz, 8MB L3 Cache, 2.5 GT/s Bus, Socket H LGA1156)
Asus M4A785TD-V EVO AMD 785G/SB710 Socket AM3 ATX Motherboard
Next-gen Atom to clock above 1GHz
Reg Sim
So does this mean... #
Posted Thursday 24th September 2009 00:51 GMT
With the extra bits put onto this Atom that it will beable to handle true HD (or 1080p)? That is what I am really intrested in, as I belive there is no current Atom based device that does, or not with out an external graphics card which sort makes 'system on a chip' pointless.
< Its not a hand grenade, its a pin holding device.
Charles Manning
Now try to challenge ARM's power usage #
Posted Thursday 24th September 2009 07:58 GMT
Hint: Less is better.
Until they can get Atom below 2 W or so they aren't in the game. That's far more important that anything else for most mobile applications.
Shades
@Reg Sim; RE: So does this mean... #
Posted Thursday 24th September 2009 07:58 GMT
My NC10 handles 1080p quite nicely ta you very muchly!
As the missus is always telling me; "It's not what you've got, it's what you do with it"
Wilco 1
How about <1W first? #
Posted Thursday 24th September 2009 08:53 GMT
The competition next year will be 40nm dual core 800MHz Cortex-A9 using 0.5W (in total, not per core). Current Atoms need 2-4W per core. Let's see whether Intel can do less than 1W with one core close to 1GHz - now that would be an achievement.
JeeBee
This round will go to ARM as well #
Posted Thursday 24th September 2009 10:48 GMT
@Wilco 1: In addition the Cortex-A9 has higher performance per clock than the Atom, so the Atom will really need its Burst Performance Mode hackery to compete. In addition I am not convinced that Intel knows what a mobile SoC should be - i.e., a single chip (maybe a MCM for the RAM, like the iPhone) that incorporates all of the application processor needs.
I assume the article means "brick with a screen and phone" when it writes "high-end smartphone" in relation to Atom?
To be fair to Atom, I expect the next generation 800MHz Atom to use less power than the current generation, and to be far more aggressive (like a badger) in idle. The generation after (on 22nm) will be the one to look out for, that will be up against 28nm ARM Cortex A9s I expect.
rincewind
The future #
Posted Thursday 24th September 2009 12:52 GMT
In 10 years i reckon desktop/notebook/mobile cpus will be pretty much the same speed.
Insane.
Anonymous Coward
Overclocking? #
Posted Thursday 24th September 2009 20:15 GMT
When I were a lad, 'overclocking' meant pushing a chip above and beyond what it was warranted for by the manufacturer, sometimes beyond the bounds of stability.
Are we now saying that Intel are shipping chips which may not work at top speed, which may even be unstable? If not, where's the overclocking? I realise that most Windows systems wouldn't notice hardware instability if it hit them in the face, they'd usually quite rightly blame the OS, but users of phones based on something other than Windows Mobile might care.
Quirkafleeg
Overclock mode #
Posted Friday 25th September 2009 19:52 GMT
Will devices using this chip(set) have "turbo" buttons and the obligatory 3-digit display for the FSB speed?