AMD Mobile Dual Core Spotted

[fbrdphreak]

http://www.laptoplogic.com/news/detail.php?id=508

We had a sweet little screenshot up about it, but AMD complained so its down for now. Of course you might find it on other sites

Overall looks nice, now let's see how high they can get that clock

 

[ShellGuy]

Too bad u got busted by AMD. Would have loved to see that.. Cant wait till Q3-Q4.




Will G.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: ShellGuy
Too bad u got busted by AMD. Would have loved to see that.. Cant wait till Q3-Q4.




Will G.

*cough* http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=812 *cough*

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: ShellGuy
Too bad u got busted by AMD. Would have loved to see that.. Cant wait till Q3-Q4.




Will G.

*cough* http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=812 *cough*

Hehe, they haven't contacted me yet

 

[lazybum131]

which will not launch until July at the earliest

Ouch, what happened to the 'Early 06' launch?

 

[cheesehead]

Go AMD!

From what I've seen, HyperTransport better supports multiple processors than Intel's approach, and I would'nt be surprised if AMD churned out some amazing new power-management technology.
Also, they don't need a new chipset; it should be a lot easier to turn a dual-channel S754 board into a S939 board than it would be upgrading from one Intel chipset to another.
That, and there are already at least two or three S939 laptops.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
Go AMD!

From what I've seen, HyperTransport better supports multiple processors than Intel's approach, and I would'nt be surprised if AMD churned out some amazing new power-management technology.
Also, they don't need a new chipset; it should be a lot easier to turn a dual-channel S754 board into a S939 board than it would be upgrading from one Intel chipset to another.
That, and there are already at least two or three S939 laptops.

S2 (the new mobile dual core socket) will require a new chipset, that much is known.

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
Go AMD!

From what I've seen, HyperTransport better supports multiple processors than Intel's approach,

It's only better than the FSB approach. It isn't better than the shared cache approach of Yonah.

and I would'nt be surprised if AMD churned out some amazing new power-management technology.

They wil need it and more against Yonah. Heavy undervolting is the only way they're going to hit their 35W TDP mark at 90nm. Meanwhile, Yonah at standard voltage is closer to 20W.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: Accord99

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
Go AMD!

From what I've seen, HyperTransport better supports multiple processors than Intel's approach,

It's only better than the FSB approach. It isn't better than the shared cache approach of Yonah.

and I would'nt be surprised if AMD churned out some amazing new power-management technology.

They wil need it and more against Yonah. Heavy undervolting is the only way they're going to hit their 35W TDP mark at 90nm. Meanwhile, Yonah at standard voltage is closer to 20W.

So you're comparing AMD's TDP to Intel's "standard voltage" ? Yeah, THAT makes sense.

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
So you're comparing AMD's TDP to Intel's "standard voltage" ? Yeah, THAT makes sense.

No, I'm saying that undervolting was the only way AMD could come close to having a 90nm DC Turion that had a realworld full load power usage of 35W. Meanwhile, at standard voltages, Yonah has a realworld power full load power usage of 20W.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: Accord99

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
So you're comparing AMD's TDP to Intel's "standard voltage" ? Yeah, THAT makes sense.

No, I'm saying that undervolting was the only way AMD could come close to having a 90nm DC Turion that had a realworld full load power usage of 35W. Meanwhile, at standard voltages, Yonah has a realworld power full load power usage of 20W.

And what I'm saying is that you're comparing AMD's TDP to Yonah's average power consumption. Apples and oranges my friend, apples and oranges.

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: Accord99

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
So you're comparing AMD's TDP to Intel's "standard voltage" ? Yeah, THAT makes sense.

No, I'm saying that undervolting was the only way AMD could come close to having a 90nm DC Turion that had a realworld full load power usage of 35W. Meanwhile, at standard voltages, Yonah has a realworld power full load power usage of 20W.

And what I'm saying is that you're comparing AMD's TDP to Yonah's average power consumption. Apples and oranges my friend, apples and oranges.

And you're missing the reviews which show under load, a Turion ML uses twice as much power as Dothan. The latest one is from techreport. Yonah is comparable in power usage to Dothan.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: Accord99

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: Accord99

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
So you're comparing AMD's TDP to Intel's "standard voltage" ? Yeah, THAT makes sense.

No, I'm saying that undervolting was the only way AMD could come close to having a 90nm DC Turion that had a realworld full load power usage of 35W. Meanwhile, at standard voltages, Yonah has a realworld power full load power usage of 20W.

And what I'm saying is that you're comparing AMD's TDP to Yonah's average power consumption. Apples and oranges my friend, apples and oranges.

And you're missing the reviews which show under load, a Turion ML uses twice as much power as Dothan. The latest one is from techreport. Yonah is comparable in power usage to Dothan.

Not double power usage of anything
http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q1/pentiumm-vs-turion64/index.x?pg=12

Same results we found. Dothan is more power efficient under loan, Turion more power efficient under idle/light load situations. Let's not bring THAT up again

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Not double power usage of anything
http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q1/pentiumm-vs-turion64/index.x?pg=12

Same results we found. Dothan is more power efficient under loan, Turion more power efficient under idle/light load situations. Let's not bring THAT up again [/quote]
What's the difference between idle and full load? 19W for Dothan, 40+W for Turion. Basically Dothan is to Turion, as A64 is to Prescott. Clearly, Intel's mobile TDP is very conservative, while AMD is at/beyond its TDP.

And idle power doesn't mean much, since you don't know how much the system component are using. And your Thinkpad reviews still contradict you, seeing as how they have no problems having lower idle power usage than slower, less well equipped Turions models.

 

[lazybum131]

Except until Lenovo puts in Turions in their systems for a fair comparison, all the other components can come into play to skew the results.

Can we assume that the +40W under load is all because of the CPU? One of the weaknesses that's always brought up about Turion systems is that it's not a complete platform and that the chipsets aren't as power efficient as Intel's. It would be interesting if they could compare power consumption of both chips with ATI chipsets instead of the usual Intel chipset for the Pentium M and see if power consumption goes up.