• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD says "no thanks" to smartphone business

How ironic if smart phones really the reason that Dirk got the boot. I don't recall hearing that tablets had anything to with him leaving, however. I still think that it had more to do with politics than any actual decisions that he made.
 
Last edited:
5.9 watts wont cut it in a tablet either. Their commitment to x86 will box them into a stagnated market. afaik Tegra 2 has .5 watt power consumption.
 
5.9 watts wont cut it in a tablet either. Their commitment to x86 will box them into a stagnated market. afaik Tegra 2 has .5 watt power consumption.
Click to expand...

True... those chips are 0.5watt-1watt at most.

Meanwhile Intel and AMD are doing like 5watt versions, that are still 5-10 times as much power use as a Arm chip.

Yes but the AMD/Intel chips are more powerfull.... thats true... but most people will probably pick 10 times battery life > performance, when it comes to a phone.


I think its sensable to some degree, that AMD arnt fooling themselfs into believeing they ll just march into the smart phone arena and take over the place.

I think Intel is gonna have one hellva time putting x86 into smart phones with success, when ARM is there.

The middle ground is the tablets...... x86 is more powerfull than ARM counterparts, and if they manage to get a foot in, they can probably make it work.

The bobcat at 5.9watts on 40nm is a exsample of this... just moveing it to 28nm, would probably cut its power use by half. Then your pretty close to whats "do-able" for a tablet.
 
I doubt AMD would do well if they do penetrate the smartphone market where battery life is more important than performance. If Intel has not even taken the first step to penetrate that market I think it is highly unlikely that AMD will be able to do the same.
 
Competition is fun but we all know they are not REALLY competing with each other and haven't for a while now.....
 
Arkadrel said:
The bobcat at 5.9watts on 40nm is a exsample of this... just moveing it to 28nm, would probably cut its power use by half. Then your pretty close to whats "do-able" for a tablet.
Click to expand...

A 28nm version with only 40sp would already reach the 2W
mark,so at the next shrink at 20nm , we ll have Windows7 on smartphones.
ARM wont be able to compete in perfs/Watt , it will surely
be the end of this architecture, at least in this market.
 
They're saying "no thanks" at this time based on the power restraints of AMD's x86. As soon as there are improvements in power efficiency, AMD will be very open and excited about the prospect of Smartphones, imho.
 
Sometimes Performance/watt isnt everything though.


You see it with laptops, some of them come with powerfull graphics cards.
These laptops run dry of juice within a few hours, yet sell just as good as other laptops, because people want that extra ooomphf that comes with a laptop like it (and dont mind plugging it in, or rechargeing it).

There might be a "spot" like that in the tablet market, where 86x could survive.

In the phones though.... yeah.. no way... I seriously doubt even Intel with 86x will be able to get a foothold.
 
ieatdonuts said:
I can't believe tablets is even a market. What does a tablet do that a smartphone doesn't!?!?
Click to expand...

Apple sold 9 million Ipad 2's last quarter . I believe with a gross revenue over 6 billion.

Apple also sold 9.25 million iPads during Q2, a 183% increase compared to the year-ago quarter. It’s also a whopping 97% more than in the first quarter of 2011. Clearly that’s the impact of the iPad 2′s release at work.
Including the iPod touch, Apple sold 33 million iOS devices this quarter (up 17% from my estimate of 28 million for last quarter).
Click to expand...
 
bryanW1995 said:
How ironic if smart phones really the reason that Dirk got the boot. I don't recall hearing that tablets had anything to with him leaving, however. I still think that it had more to do with politics than any actual decisions that he made.
Click to expand...

The official reason given was (I'm paraphrasing now): "he did not have good answers as to our mobile outlook". According to AMD, it had more to do with the mobile market in general. AMD never made plans, even when Dirk Meyer was there, to make X86 SoCs for smartphones.

Which makes sense when you look at the fact that X86 is too power hungry for smartphones. It can work in Windows tablets, though. The Fusion Z-01 seems very good.
 
Genx87 said:
5.9 watts wont cut it in a tablet either. Their commitment to x86 will box them into a stagnated market. afaik Tegra 2 has .5 watt power consumption.
Click to expand...

Not really. The AMD Fusion Z-01 APU is an order of a magnitude faster, especially in computational performance. In terms of integer performance even the fastest ARM SoCs in smartphones and tablets are completely embarrassed by a single-core Atom, and we know that's not exactly a speed demon.
 
In order to really know and compare, we need to know how much power the amd chip consumes when it is idle. Being able to jump up to 5.9 watts when you need the power is not a bad thing as long as it can idle in the <300mW range. That includes the fusion controller chipset too. I seriously doubt they have total cpu+chipset idle current draw at less than 500mW. I doubt its even less than a watt. That to me is the major problem. I dont want my device to drain the battery like that when it is just sitting on the table doing nothing.

With a 3600mAH 3.6V battery you can get something like 50 hours of standby time if you are only consuming 200mW. If they can do that they got me.
 
Last edited:
Apple sells cause they have a fan base. You could brand cow feces as Apple iCrap and they'll buy.

Whoever it was - I think it was Acer - that called tablets a fad. I think they're going to be spot on. It's not as portable as a smartphone and not as functional as a notebook or ultrabook.

Back to the topic....it's a smart decision, because there's no way I see x86 in a phone in at least the next 3-4 years. If I had to take a bet I'd say never.
 
Seeming more and more like Dirk was booted for these BD woes. Regarding the < 2W category, I think AMD is going to follow Intel into that territory. Intel will be at 14nm first and that's probably when a x86 1 watt cpu with decent performance compared to ARM will become a real possibility.
 
LOL_Wut_Axel said:
Not really. The AMD Fusion Z-01 APU is an order of a magnitude faster, especially in computational performance. In terms of integer performance even the fastest ARM SoCs in smartphones and tablets are completely embarrassed by a single-core Atom, and we know that's not exactly a speed demon.
Click to expand...

of course. Any arm SOC could put up a fight if it had 4x the power to play with.
 
soccerballtux said:
of course. Any arm SOC could put up a fight if it had 4x the power to play with.
Click to expand...

Make that 10X. Minimum.

ARM SoCs just aren't architecturally designed for high performance. Even a crappy, outdated single-core Atom slaps the latest ARM SoCs when it comes to integer performance. They're gonna need at least 30x more integer performance if they're hoping to catch Core 2 Duo.
 
Last edited:
If intel wanted to they could put out a low power 22nm chip with there tri gates to compete in the cell phone market.They are saying 22nm is cutting power by 50&#37; on sandy,so that is a major step forward.
 
ieatdonuts said:
What does a tablet do that a smartphone doesn't!?!?
Click to expand...
Takes up more space?
SirPauly said:
They're saying "no thanks" at this time based on the power restraints of AMD's x86. As soon as there are improvements in power efficiency, AMD will be very open and excited about the prospect of Smartphones, imho.
Click to expand...
Why did you single out " AMD's x86"? x86 in general is a very inefficient architecture, the only way it will come anywhere near something like ARM in power draw is if it is made with a much superior fab process.
ieatdonuts said:
Apple sells cause they have a fan base. You could brand cow feces as Apple iCrap and they'll buy.
Click to expand...
You are sadly mistaken. Apple makes extremely user friendly, slick products. They do exactly what people want them to do. I personally am not high on Apple products because I like the freedom to do what I want with the hardware, but for the mass market, Apple makes brilliant products.
Whoever it was - I think it was Acer - that called tablets a fad. I think they're going to be spot on. It's not as portable as a smartphone and not as functional as a notebook or ultrabook.
Click to expand...
I think tablets have passed the point of being a fad, they continue to sell like crazy. Reminds me of the Steve Ballmer quote, "iPhone has no chance of gaining any market share". Yea, tablets are also a fad.
Back to the topic....it's a smart decision, because there's no way I see x86 in a phone in at least the next 3-4 years. If I had to take a bet I'd say never.
Click to expand...
This I agree with, x86 doesn't scale down in power worth a damn, and it's a clunky architecture in the 1st place.
 
grkM3 said:
If intel wanted to they could put out a low power 22nm chip with there tri gates to compete in the cell phone market.They are saying 22nm is cutting power by 50% on sandy,so that is a major step forward.
Click to expand...
Here we go again, the almighty Intel could take over the world, but they don't feel like it right now. :| :hmm:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top