Engadget: AMD to demo "Zacate" next week.

[cbn]

Deleted.

 

[Nemesis 1]

What would you have them demo Zacate with Nemesis 1? Pentium mobile dual core?

What else Atom with NV graphics would have been the correct choice.

Oak trail and Zapata will be going head to head soon enough. Hell I got SB right here and have no idea how it O/C s I have Oak here but its not fully functional but it is impressive. Its wait and see. type deal. I got Bob all over my back because I say to much . But really I don't have anything else to do . My daughter just had a baby . So I don't get my grandson for another month and 2 weeks . I not sure they going to give him back to me all things considered but I will fight for my right.

 

[sciwizam]

Take this with a ton of NaCl: Fudzilla claims Zacate CPU is 1.6GHz and GPU is 500MHz.

http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/processors/processors/zacate-fusion-works-at-16ghz

 

[Zstream]

I don't understand what all the complaining is about. The issue with lower end devices is rarely the CPU but rather a weak gpu.

For instance a su2300 is plenty fast for a netbook or a small notebook like the hp5310. The problem is, even with hardware acceleration in flash it still kills the CPU because the gpu is poor. With a proper Gpu, hardware acceleration is now a reality.

 

[cbn]

I don't understand what all the complaining is about. The issue with lower end devices is rarely the CPU but rather a weak gpu.

For instance a su2300 is plenty fast for a netbook or a small notebook like the hp5310. The problem is, even with hardware acceleration in flash it still kills the CPU because the gpu is poor. With a proper Gpu, hardware acceleration is now a reality.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3931/netbook-and-tablet-fever-at-idf-2010

Interesting point. Apparently the new N550 netbooks (even with dual atom cores) still have trouble with HD flash.

So it will be interesting to see what GPU Intel decides to use with Cedar Trail. I think IntelUser2000 mentioned earlier it might be a Intel HD variant rather than Power VR SGX.

 

[extra]

Zstream is right on the mark, which is why I think Ontario stuff (and Llano) will do well.

The lowest of the low end core2duo / athlon 2 stuff is fast enough for most things honestly.

And with the Intel Atom PowerVR stuff, I think the biggest issue with that is actually not the capability of the hardware itself, but drivers. There was a huge debacle about that with GMA500. Now that there's actually competition coming, they may finally be more worried about that vs it out performing their in house GMA stuff .

 

[Cerb]

So it will be interesting to see what GPU Intel decides to use with Cedar Trail. I think IntelUser2000 mentioned earlier it might be a Intel HD variant rather than Power VR SGX.

If they want it to not be treated like a leper, it aught to be. AFAICT, there still aren't widely available drivers that work right for GMA 500, and I haven't heard Intel say anything about changing their various agreements for using PowerVR's tech, with GMA 600. If it's going to have gimped graphics, at least let them be genuine Intel gimped graphics, not an IP bramble patch of Intel/Imagination/Tungsten.

 

[Idontcare]

Take this with a ton of NaCl: Fudzilla claims Zacate CPU is 1.6GHz and GPU is 500MHz.

http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/processors/processors/zacate-fusion-works-at-16ghz

http://www.semiaccurate.com/forums/showpost.php?p=67272&postcount=291

credit IntelUser2000

 

[Dravic]

And for everyone defending AMD by saying its an "honest" mistake that they weren't using the latest Intel drivers for there tests you're pretty naive.

They were using the latest drivers available on the manufacturers website, and it took a FORCED driver install by Anand to fix the issue.

Which brings me to the last point. There was virtually no mention of the CPU performance. All the focus has been on the GPU side. The only numbers that have been seen was that a bobcat core would be about as fast as a Core 2, I believe the benchmark listed the Core 2 at 1.6 GHz and an Atom at 1.66 GHz, however the bobcat frequency was not disclosed. This is troubling to me because in the past AMD has done this. Claiming so and so is "as fast" or "about the same speed as" and it always turned out there claims were based not on a clock for clock comparison but a higher clocked AMD part to a lower clocked Intel part. This leads me to believe the CPU side of Zacate is gonna be alot weaker then what people are expecting.

I dont think there was a single CPU benchmark in either article. The IE9 benchmark appears to be a 2d benchmark saturated by even the lowest IGP's. I don't think AMD is releasing any bobcat/bulldozer CPU information yet at all. This looks to be purely about the APU's graphically ability rather then some kind of omission from AMD. Besides clock for clock hasn't been a comparison staple since when? the Athlon/P4 days...? Since Intel went with the Core architecture over netburst and started impoving IPC the comparisons have been primarily dollar vs dollar, and performance per watt.

 

[cbn]

And with the Intel Atom PowerVR stuff, I think the biggest issue with that is actually not the capability of the hardware itself, but drivers. There was a huge debacle about that with GMA500. Now that there's actually competition coming, they may finally be more worried about that vs it out performing their in house GMA stuff .

If they want it to not be treated like a leper, it aught to be. AFAICT, there still aren't widely available drivers that work right for GMA 500, and I haven't heard Intel say anything about changing their various agreements for using PowerVR's tech, with GMA 600. If it's going to have gimped graphics, at least let them be genuine Intel gimped graphics, not an IP bramble patch of Intel/Imagination/Tungsten.

If Intel were able to improve GMA 500/GMA 600 drivers (in response to competition from Ontario) could we see existing products like N550 (or maybe even the single core atoms) become capable of HD Flash?

 

[Cerb]

If Intel were able to improve GMA 500/GMA 600 drivers (in response to competition from Ontario) could we see existing products like N550 (or maybe even the single core atoms) become capable of HD Flash?

Likely, but how? The problem with those drivers is a problem of licensing. Imagination's hardware does not have openly documented interfaces, and Intel is both a significant shareholder, and competitor.

 

[Zstream]

If Intel were able to improve GMA 500/GMA 600 drivers (in response to competition from Ontario) could we see existing products like N550 (or maybe even the single core atoms) become capable of HD Flash?

They can a little I guess. However, the architecture is poorly inefficient for that purpose.

 

[extra]

They can a little I guess. However, the architecture is poorly inefficient for that purpose.

Ehhh, hard to say. Probably not really (for flash) but I bet they could get a lot better gaming performance.

Actually, I think there are some weird GMA drivers that enable *substantially* higher gaming performance. However, they don't support Aero. I'm about 90% sure on this, but i don't have a link, sorry.

EDIT: Clarifying that I'm talking about the GMA500.

 

[Zstream]

If they want it to not be treated like a leper, it aught to be. AFAICT, there still aren't widely available drivers that work right for GMA 500, and I haven't heard Intel say anything about changing their various agreements for using PowerVR's tech, with GMA 600. If it's going to have gimped graphics, at least let them be genuine Intel gimped graphics, not an IP bramble patch of Intel/Imagination/Tungsten.

PowerVR has been in use for a while now.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-atom-cpu,1947-3.html

 

[IntelUser2000]

PowerVR has been in use for a while now.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-atom-cpu,1947-3.html

None of the Netbooks(read: that people actually buy) use the PowerVR IP though. They all use some form of GMA950.

The newer drivers actually allow the Atom Z5xx+Poulsbo to run 720p from the hard drive, even certain 1080p, but 720p flash struggles. I have such a device, and reviews point that out as well.

Now that there's actually competition coming, they may finally be more worried about that vs it out performing their in house GMA stuff.

They say the E680 chip with 400MHz core gets 270 in 3DMark05 while the older Menlow with Z530 chip got 115. GMA 3150 based Netbooks get average of 300. So with 2x higher clock they managed to catch up to the GMA 3150. LOL, I'm not holding my breath for this one.

 

[Cerb]

PowerVR has been in use for a while now.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-atom-cpu,1947-3.html

You still need special versions of Linux to even think about it working reasonably well, and it's not because of the hardware being bad. Having time doesn't mean much, in this case.

The only coming benefit will be that they do have Intel versions, and most people should know by now what they need to look for. With GMA500, many users got burned, as it was assumed that Intel did a good job of supporting GPUs they included.

 

[P4man]

Are we positively certain the intel laptop had a Core i5 520M, rather than a Core i5 520 UM ? The UM has the same 18W TDP as zacate, which would make it reasonable as comparison. But the UM runs at only 1 GHz (1.8 Turbo) with GPU @ 500 MHz. The 520M runs at 2.4/2.9 turbo and its GPU at 733 MHz. Thats a huge difference.

Frankly, the 520 UM would seem like a better reference point for a 1.6 GHz 18W zacate. I wouldnt blame AMD for using that, but if they did, they should say so. Its not nearly as impressive to beat that in GPU limited games.

 

[Riek]

Are we positively certain the intel laptop had a Core i5 520M, rather than a Core i5 520 UM ? The UM has the same 18W TDP as zacate, which would make it reasonable as comparison. But the UM runs at only 1 GHz (1.8 Turbo) with GPU @ 500 MHz. The 520M runs at 2.4/2.9 turbo and its GPU at 733 MHz. Thats a huge difference.

Frankly, the 520 UM would seem like a better reference point for a 1.6 GHz 18W zacate. I wouldnt blame AMD for using that, but if they did, they should say so. Its not nearly as impressive to beat that in GPU limited games.

Yes, it is confirmed that it was a regular i5-M with system properties. Can be seen in one of the video's also.

 

[MrK6]

Yes, it is confirmed that it was a regular i5-M with system properties. Can be seen in one of the video's also.

That's pretty impressive on AMD's part. Looks like they're finally stepping up in the mobile division, something they've been needing to do for a long time.

 

[Idontcare]

That's pretty impressive on AMD's part. Looks like they're finally stepping up in the mobile division, something they've been needing to do for a long time.

I think it is impressive in two distinct areas...firstly it is an impressive feat microarchitecture-wise.

Secondly it is an impressive feat process technology-wise considering that this is a general-purpose foundry process, it is bulk-Si (no SOI advantages for power) and it is not HKMG.

We can't really make any arguments regarding R&D engineering efficiency because for all we know AMD poured 5x more budget into developing Ontario compared to what Intel may have spent developing Atom (its respective platform, not atom the cpu core).

But in an absolute vacuum to the knowledge of development resources involved, the product is quite impressive on a number of levels.

 

[Martimus]

I know this is offtopic, but since everyone is talking about the Intel graphics drivers being poor in the past, but have updated drivers now, I am wondering how I get these updated drivers? I am not sure what IGP I have, but the device manager says my display adaptor is an Intel series 4 chipset (The processor is a T4200). Any idea where I can get the updated drivers for this? If it fixes my problems, I can save the money of buying a cheap Ontario laptop to replace it.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Drivers are not gonna make that much of a difference. What kind of problems are you having?

T4200 is a Pentium dual core. You probably have a value version of the GMA 4500, but they sometimes use the mainstream GMA 4500.

http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Sea...Mobile+Intel®+4+Series+Express+Chipset+Family

Since its a laptop you likely need to do manual installation to make it work. The laptop's gonna complain its not compatible blah blah.

I think if you do some little 3D waiting for Ontario won't hurt.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Its a good effort by AMD . But there upagainst alot more than graphics performance here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=venZaZUOhlI

 

[richierich1212]

Its a good effort by AMD . But there upagainst alot more than graphics performance here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=venZaZUOhlI

I guess. What will the wireless display need? Just an adapter for current TVs? I don't really see the need for tablets unless they can get down more in price.

 

[Nemesis 1]

I guess. What will the wireless display need? Just an adapter for current TVs? I don't really see the need for tablets unless they can get down more in price.

I believe engagenent has a good Video on the complete wireless Set up for Intel PRODUCTS only . Thats Software and hardware. All intel system will be able to use that have the hardware.

Down the line I believe the Windriver purchase was the Best investment the company has ever made . So Only Intel systems can Use the intel wireless wifi platforms . Once the reciever is hooked to the TV your hooked up for all intel systems you own