AMD 15W single-core and 22W dual-core

[Idontcare]

Google translated to English:

AMD Athlon 2650e processor Energy-saving 15W K8

AMD Athlon X2 3250e processor 22W low-power dual-core

Performance/watt at the wall is quite intriguing. In the past about how well seriously undervolted Athlon core would do in comparison to Atom...now we know. No idea if price/performance is atom comparative but knowing AMD it will be.

 

[Martimus]

I like seing these things, because it means competition, but at the same time this is the sort of thing I was saying that AMD should avoid as well.

Seeing them try to cover all of the markets, but come up short of Intel in most of them probably isn't the way for a floundering company to go.

Cut your losses, and re-emphasize what you do best. You can compete with Intel, but you can't compete with them at everything they do, because you just don't have the resources to do it. Once you have a strong foothold on those core products, you can branch out to these other markets.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

I think AMD needs this in the business space. AMD is trying to market themselves as a viable solution for corporate desktops, and they need the brand recognition and at least the appearance of homogeneity. The more AMD stickers they can get on hardware, the more mainstream they will appear to conservative Corporate America - and globally.

Back around 1995 or so, a mortgage company I worked for decided to transition the servers from Novell to NT. The reason given: since we already use MS Windows and MS Office, we may as well use NT instead of Novell.

 

[mooseracing]

I'm not sure where the perforamce/watt comes at compared to Atom but AMD's latest Geodes use the Socket A platform and soem are closer to 5-10 watts

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Martimus
I like seing these things, because it means competition, but at the same time this is the sort of thing I was saying that AMD should avoid as well.

Seeing them try to cover all of the markets, but come up short of Intel in most of them probably isn't the way for a floundering company to go.

Cut your losses, and re-emphasize what you do best. You can compete with Intel, but you can't compete with them at everything they do, because you just don't have the resources to do it. Once you have a strong foothold on those core products, you can branch out to these other markets.

A possible factor here is fab utilization versus incremental cost structure.

The incremental cost structure for AMD to sell 65nm Athlons is pretty minimal because they own all the equipment already and they have the fab space sitting there in Dresden just idling.

Very minimal investment cost for AMD to offer these chips, and presumably they are capable of selling them at the current (and future lower) price points for a profit and positive cash-flow.

Were they looking at having to buy new tools or expand fab capacity in order to support this new product lineup then I'd agree with you, stretching a thin company all the thinner. But as it stands, with the current transition of flagship products to 45nm, they have plenty of low-cost depreciated 65nm capacity to put to work on low-dollar saleable product.

Exactly what Via was probably hoping AMD would not do.

 

[AdamK47]

How well do they overclock?

 

[Denithor]

Could be great for a niche application.

More info there. Interesting take on things, good read.

AMD is targeting the ultra-thin ten to 13-inch, $499 to $1,499 segment between sub-$499 netbook and big, clunky mainstream notebooks. It's a brave move, but we think it's a clever one - if you look at any cheap notebook now on sale it's either 15.4-inch brick with a mix of cheap parts or an ultra teeny netbook that's barely capable of running video, let alone do two things at once.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: mooseracing
I'm not sure where the perforamce/watt comes at compared to Atom but AMD's latest Geodes use the Socket A platform and soem are closer to 5-10 watts

With Socket A they are highly limited by the chipset - SiS or nForce2 IGP, low FSB, sdram, etc.

With the AMD Athlon 2650e and the 780g/sb700 chipset versus Atom/945 I would think feature-set would be certainly more attractive and overall power consumption not totally out-of-line in the segment - probably competitive power-wise with the old Socky A.

Originally posted by: AdamK47
How well do they overclock?

3GHz+ ?? But yah might need LN

 

[Martimus]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Martimus
I like seing these things, because it means competition, but at the same time this is the sort of thing I was saying that AMD should avoid as well.

Seeing them try to cover all of the markets, but come up short of Intel in most of them probably isn't the way for a floundering company to go.

Cut your losses, and re-emphasize what you do best. You can compete with Intel, but you can't compete with them at everything they do, because you just don't have the resources to do it. Once you have a strong foothold on those core products, you can branch out to these other markets.

A possible factor here is fab utilization versus incremental cost structure.

The incremental cost structure for AMD to sell 65nm Athlons is pretty minimal because they own all the equipment already and they have the fab space sitting there in Dresden just idling.

Very minimal investment cost for AMD to offer these chips, and presumably they are capable of selling them at the current (and future lower) price points for a profit and positive cash-flow.

Were they looking at having to buy new tools or expand fab capacity in order to support this new product lineup then I'd agree with you, stretching a thin company all the thinner. But as it stands, with the current transition of flagship products to 45nm, they have plenty of low-cost depreciated 65nm capacity to put to work on low-dollar saleable product.

Exactly what Via was probably hoping AMD would not do.

I look more at the development costs than the manufacturing costs, because that is my line of work, but I see where you are getting at. These probably don't have a whole lot of development work either, so it makes a lot of sense when you put it that way.

I wish I could read the reviews to see how they compare with other processors, but I don't want to open a chinese website. Maybe when I get home I will take a look.

 

[ajaidevsingh]

I think their performance can be directly linked with the Athlon Neo the great thing is even the single core solution seems ahead of the VIA Nano but if the intel C2S ULV does get relesed it might as well take the top spot followed by the athlon and nano..... Atom will be last in terms of performance....