Will Bobcat be the home run AMD is looking for?

[maddie]

This is what I was expecting/hoping for:

Ontario:
1.0 GHz single-core for the ultra low end market
1.0 GHz dual-core for the bulk of the market
1.2 GHz dual-core


Zacate:
1.6 GHz single-core for the ultra low end market
1.6 GHz dual-core for the bulk of the market
1.8 GHz dual-core for the "high end", rather optimistic I admit.


Instead we got:

Ontario:
1.2 GHz single-core <-- I suspect this will represent the bulk of the Ontario market.
1.0 GHz dual-core

Zacate:
1.5 GHz single-core
1.6 GHz dual-core

This means to me that dual-core pricing is likely going to be a bit higher than I hoped, with the product mix for cheap netbooks still mostly single-core.

With 1.0 GHz dual-core Ontario as a near-baseline model, it would have taken over the netbook market by storm. With 1.2 GHz single-core as the real baseline model, it's still an improvement over Atom/GMA, but may not be the "homerun" some people were predicting.

Still, it's not completely surprising. The hype was getting out of hand. BTW, I suspect the orphaned CPU there for AnandTech types may be the 1.5 GHz single-core Zacate.

I can see AnandTechers buying:
Single-core 1.2 GHz netbooks
Dual-core 1.0 GHz netbooks and nettops/SFF machines.
Dual-core 1.6 GHz laptops and nettops/SFF machines. (I would buy a nettop with dual-core Zacate.)

I'm not entirely sure where 1.5 GHz single-core would fit for AnandTech types.

Do you really have a problem with the released chips?

 

[Eug]

The top Ontario and Zacate chips (ie. dual-core) I'm OK with. They didn't blow me away but they're definitely OK.

I betcha the #1 seller here is going to be single-core Ontario though, and that's not necessarily a good thing, cuz it means the netbook market is likely still going to be mostly single-core, unless AMD is able to work miracles with the dual-core yields and the pricing.

IOW, so far I'm thinking it's a good start, but it ain't a homerun.

If you don't believe me, check out this table:

It would suggest to me that pricing may actually be higher than Atom. That higher-than-Atom-pricing is justified in terms of performance, but that in itself will mean that it won't take over the netbook market overnight.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Zacate will make the atom obsolete.

Not really. That depends on the market segment. TV will not be one of them.

Some indications on CPU performance:

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTI4OTIzNDg4N1pRV0tBTVdKRlNfMV8yMl9sLmpwZw==

E-240 chip which is a 1.5GHz 1 core 18W part gets 1541 on PCMark Vantage.

Athlon Neo K125 is a 1.7GHz 1 core part and gets 2180.


PCMark is a system benchmark. Underperforming the previous part by 30% with 12% lower clock and superior GPU means the CPU component is likely dragging the score down.

 

[Eug]

Ontario does not get Vision branding, which isn't surprising given the ultra low clock speeds.

So basically anyone wanting a SFF HTPC will need to get Zacate, and much preferably dual-core.

 

[maddie]

The top Ontario and Zacate chips (ie. dual-core) I'm OK with. They didn't blow me away but they're definitely OK.

I betcha the #1 seller here is going to be single-core Ontario though, and that's not necessarily a good thing, cuz it means the netbook market is likely still going to be mostly single-core, unless AMD is able to work miracles with the dual-core yields and the pricing.

IOW, so far I'm thinking it's a good start, but it ain't a homerun.

If you don't believe me, check out this table:

It would suggest to me that pricing may actually be higher than Atom. That higher-than-Atom-pricing is justified in terms of performance, but that in itself will mean that it won't take over the netbook market overnight.

An Atom sized chip competing with a (2 steps higher) Pentium is not a home run? This is considered just OK. Amazing.

In this cpu class AMD is doing to Intel what they are doing to Nvidia in the gpu market with 6xxx designs.

I think it's brilliant. Amd will only charge more because they can, not because of cost constraints.

A tiny dual core chip like this with the full AMD experience of 40nm tech will have super yields and low costs. What are you smoking?



http://www.anandtech.com/show/4003/...-1-more-details-on-zacateontario-and-fusion/2

Both APUs are built from the same die. Zacate and Ontario are physically identical, they just run at different clock speeds. The 40nm die is manufactured at TSMC and measures 75mm^2. The chip is very cheap to package as well. The BGA package only has 413 balls. As one AMDer put it, these chips are designed to be stamped out as quickly and as cheaply as possible.

​

 

[Gigantopithecus]

I think it's worth considering how well the netbook manufacturers implement the new AMD chips. I did not buy an Asus EEEPC when it first came out because its build quality was underwhelming and its keyboard was not acceptable to me (for a number of reasons). Similarly, MSI's Wind netbooks are relatively poorly-built. I only bought a netbook when Samsung released the NC10. Two years later, my Samsung is still going strong while I've seen a number of friends' EEEPCs and Winds die already.

I am very, very close to pulling the trigger on a Samsung NF310, which has a dual core Atom and the 3150 igp. It looks like the dual core Zacate will handily best the Atom/3150 system, but we'll find out next week when Anand releases actual numbers. If Zacate's performance is not substantially better than the currently available Intel solution, I will not wait three-four months to replace the single core first-gen Atom netbook I'm using.

 

[Eug]

No, from the consumer perspective I do not consider a higher than Atom performing CPU priced above the Atom market neccessarily a homerun.

If it displaced Atom at the low end too, that would be a homerun. However, we don't know for sure. It's possible AMD will price it more aggressively than their table suggests.

 

[busydude]

A tiny dual core chip like this with the full AMD experience of 40nm tech will have super yields and low costs. What are you smoking?

Cool down there Charlie, there is nothing wrong in getting excited about product launches.. I am excited too.. that does not mean you have shove your opinion down everyone's throat.

 

[maddie]

No, from the consumer perspective I do not consider a higher than Atom performing CPU priced above the Atom market neccessarily a homerun.

If it displaced Atom at the low end too, that would be a homerun. However, we don't know for sure. It's possible AMD will price it more aggressively than their table suggests.

Thats what I mean. It's a homerun for AMD.

If we assume that the function of any company's management is to optimize shareholder value, then Amd has the ability to price as necessary to maximize revenue, profits or whatever is deemed necessary. I certainly won't blame them for trying to get some decent returns for a change.

Hopefully they will go for market share and compete strongly with Atom. I too am in the market for a cheap decent ultraportable.

 

[maddie]

Cool down there Charlie, there is nothing wrong in getting excited about product launches.. I am excited too.. that does not mean you have shove your opinion down everyone's throat.

Please tell how it's possible to force my opinion on anyone here? I might have been impolite, but everyone has freedom to accept and believe whatever they want.

 

[Eug]

Same here. I want a cheap 11.6" dual-core netbook but with decent HD decode capabilities, under $400. I also want a cheap dual-core Zacate nettop which can function as a full fledged but secondary desktop, under $400 (without optical drive).

If they're $500, I'm less interested and probably not buying. And if they're $600 I'm definitely not buying.

If people don't buy, then it's not really a homerun from AMD from the business perspective either. That's why pricing is key.

And even at that price range - $399 for Ontario dual-core - I won't be the first to buy. The fact that Ontario doesn't get Vision branding is a concern. I'll let others be the guinea pigs first with regards to video decode performance, both with local files and online HD Flash content. Anand will have numbers next week, but it seems that Ontario benches won't be there.

I think it's worth considering how well the netbook manufacturers implement the new AMD chips. I did not buy an Asus EEEPC when it first came out because its build quality was underwhelming and its keyboard was not acceptable to me (for a number of reasons). Similarly, MSI's Wind netbooks are relatively poorly-built. I only bought a netbook when Samsung released the NC10. Two years later, my Samsung is still going strong while I've seen a number of friends' EEEPCs and Winds die already.

I am very, very close to pulling the trigger on a Samsung NF310, which has a dual core Atom and the 3150 igp. It looks like the dual core Zacate will handily best the Atom/3150 system, but we'll find out next week when Anand releases actual numbers. If Zacate's performance is not substantially better than the currently available Intel solution, I will not wait three-four months to replace the single core first-gen Atom netbook I'm using.

The one machine I'd pay well over $600 for Zacate would be a MacBook Air. I'm not convinced Apple will make use of Zacate though. Given the power considerations they'd be fine sticking with Intel ULV non-Atom chips.

 

[IntelUser2000]

The core size estimations were right for Bobcat. The upper parts are the two cores.

 

[Dark_Archonis]

Thats what I mean. It's a homerun for AMD.

If we assume that the function of any company's management is to optimize shareholder value, then Amd has the ability to price as necessary to maximize revenue, profits or whatever is deemed necessary. I certainly won't blame them for trying to get some decent returns for a change.

Hopefully they will go for market share and compete strongly with Atom. I too am in the market for a cheap decent ultraportable.

That does not make it a "home run". Reality will show us whether in fact it is a home run or not. Objective measures of that would be the market share Bobcat achieves, acceptance of Bobcat systems among "Joe public", revenue, number of OEMs that use Bobcat in their systems, and other similar metrics.

 

[IntelUser2000]

I estimate the graphics performance of Brazos platform to be:

9W 280MHz chips: ~890GX performance
18W 500MHz chips: 1.5x 890GX

For the 9W parts, some games will obviously be CPU bound, but in the most case it'll perform on par with desktop parts using the 700MHz core.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

Same here. I want a cheap 11.6" dual-core netbook but with decent HD decode capabilities, under $400. I also want a cheap dual-core Zacate nettop which can function as a full fledged but secondary desktop, under $400 (without optical drive).

If they're $500, I'm less interested and probably not buying. And if they're $600 I'm definitely not buying.

If people don't buy, then it's not really a homerun from AMD from the business perspective either. That's why pricing is key.

And even at that price range - $399 for Ontario dual-core - I won't be the first to buy. The fact that Ontario doesn't get Vision branding is a concern. I'll let others be the guinea pigs first with regards to video decode performance, both with local files and online HD Flash content. Anand will have numbers next week, but it seems that Ontario benches won't be there.


The one machine I'd pay well over $600 for Zacate would be a MacBook Air. I'm not convinced Apple will make use of Zacate though. Given the power considerations they'd be fine sticking with Intel ULV non-Atom chips.

Another concern is how Microsoft will react to Zacate's capabilities. AFAIK the major reason existing Atom netbooks (both single and dual core variants) are capped at 2gb RAM capacity is Windows 7 Starter, though I'm sure there are technical reasons as well. Microsoft does not want 7 Home Premium factory installed on netbooks - and since 7 Starter is shit, add $50+ to the cost of any netbook to get 7 Home Premium on it.

Here's how I see things unfolding:
$200-300 netbooks: AMD Ontario or single core Intel Atom, both with Windows 7 Starter, both likely capped at 2gb RAM capacity. AMD's single core Ontario should take this segment from Intel's single core Atom. These users won't care that they're using 7 Starter, but will prefer an AMD-based netbook because it should offer a better all-around computing experience with substantially better media performance. I seriously doubt AMD Ontario-based netbooks will be offered that support 4gb of RAM and carry a $50-100 premium because they come preloaded with 7 Home Premium. AFAIK the cheaper netbooks (those $300 or less) greatly outsell the higher-end netbooks so this should be good news, period, for AMD.

$300-400 netbooks: AMD Zacate or dual core Intel Atom. I *hope* AMD doesn't cap Zacate at 2gb to satisfy Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter limitation. Assuming they don't, AMD Zacate netbooks that come with 7 Home Premium will carry (minimally) a $50 premium over Intel Atom netbooks that will still come with 7 Starter. This is bad because even though you're getting a real OS, and Zacate should be substantially better than the dual core Atom, the Zacate netbooks will be more expensive.

Personally, I would gladly pay $450 for a well-built, high endurance (long battery life) Zacate netbook that comes with 7 Home Premium 64, even if I have to drop another $50 getting it up to 4gb RAM. DDR3 pulls so little juice that an extra SODIMM shouldn't cramp battery life too badly. My main disappointment right now is that well-built, high endurance Atom netbooks simply *can't* be upgraded to 4gb RAM. 7 on 2gb is unpalatable.

If Apple released an 11.6" Air that did nothing other than swap out the Intel cpu and Nvidia gpu for an AMD Zacate and dropped the price by $100 or $200 (to $900 or $800), I don't think they'd be able to keep it in stock, and I'd definitely consider buying it instead of spending half as much on a Zacate PC netbook.

 

[Eug]

2 GB doesn't bother me that much for a netbook, but I agree 3-4 GB is preferable. Nonetheless, even ignoring the RAM issue, I agree about not wanting Windows 7 Starter.

I will also point out that 11.6" netbooks (notebooks?) with Core i3 and Intel HD graphics are now sometimes well under $600, with 3 GB RAM and Windows 7 Home Premium 64. If in response to Zacate Intel dropped Core i3 pricing low enough to make $499 11.6" Core i3 machines feasible, that would go a long way in resisting the Zacate onslaught. Intel HD may be a terrible gamer, but it's a very well respected video playback solution.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Intel is planning few more CULV chips in early 2011. One is Celeron 743, which is a ULV single core Penryn chip clocked at 1.4GHz.

More Brazos platform 3D numbers:

1750 3DMark06 for 9W Ontario

Did some calculations based on AMD's 3DMark Vantage numbers. On the GPU section, the 500MHz graphics parts score 30&#37; better than 890GX. 9W 280MHz parts should be within plus or minus 10% opposite 785G.

 

[cbn]

Another concern is how Microsoft will react to Zacate's capabilities.

I'm glad you brought this up. I have been concerned about this for a while now.

AFAIK the major reason existing Atom netbooks (both single and dual core variants) are capped at 2gb RAM capacity is Windows 7 Starter, though I'm sure there are technical reasons as well. Microsoft does not want 7 Home Premium factory installed on netbooks - and since 7 Starter is shit, add $50+ to the cost of any netbook to get 7 Home Premium on it.

Here's how I see things unfolding:
$200-300 netbooks: AMD Ontario or single core Intel Atom, both with Windows 7 Starter, both likely capped at 2gb RAM capacity. These users won't care that they're using 7 Starter, but will prefer an AMD-based netbook because it should offer a better all-around computing experience with substantially better media performance. I seriously doubt AMD Ontario-based netbooks will be offered that support 4gb of RAM and carry a $50-100 premium because they come preloaded with 7 Home Premium. AFAIK the cheaper netbooks (those $300 or less) greatly outsell the higher-end netbooks so this should be good news, period, for AMD.

Agreed. (although I am very skeptical of the $200-$300 netbook market. Are the manufacturers even making money here?)

$300-400 netbooks: AMD Zacate or dual core Intel Atom. I *hope* AMD doesn't cap Zacate at 2gb to satisfy Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter limitation. Assuming they don't, AMD Zacate netbooks that come with 7 Home Premium will carry (minimally) a $50 premium over Intel Atom netbooks that will still come with 7 Starter. This is bad because even though you're getting a real OS, and Zacate should be substantially better than the dual core Atom, the Zacate netbooks will be more expensive.

Personally, I would gladly pay $450 for a well-built, high endurance (long battery life) Zacate netbook that comes with 7 Home Premium 64, even if I have to drop another $50 getting it up to 4gb RAM. DDR3 pulls so little juice that an extra SODIMM shouldn't cramp battery life too badly. My main disappointment right now is that well-built, high endurance Atom netbooks simply *can't* be upgraded to 4gb RAM. 7 on 2gb is unpalatable.

I can see AMD pairing Zacate with Windows 7 Home Premium.

If Apple released an 11.6" Air that did nothing other than swap out the Intel cpu and Nvidia gpu for an AMD Zacate and dropped the price by $100 or $200 (to $900 or $800), I don't think they'd be able to keep it in stock, and I'd definitely consider buying it instead of spending half as much on a Zacate PC netbook.

We also need to consider what Zacate could do for Apple Mac Book Air 11.6" run time. If the single chip allows for a smaller PCB design....will that allow for 10 hours via a larger battery?

Maybe if Apple can get 10+ hours they won't necessarily have to lower their prices?

 

[Eug]

Intel is planning few more CULV chips in early 2011. One is Celeron 743, which is a ULV single core Penryn chip clocked at 1.4GHz.

How is that really better than dual-core Atom?

 

[cbn]

More Brazos platform 3D numbers:

1750 3DMark06 for 9W Ontario

Did some calculations based on AMD's 3DMark Vantage numbers. On the GPU section, the 500MHz graphics parts score 30&#37; better than 890GX. 9W 280MHz parts should be within plus or minus 10% opposite 785G.

Thanks for bringing these scores up. How do these numbers relate to both CULV Arrandale GPU and regular voltage Arrandale GPU?

P.S. Does anyone have ideas on what type of silicon these GPUs use? Are the Ontario/Zacate GPUs built on a special low leakage process or do they use the same silicon as discrete Radeons?

 

[IntelUser2000]

The 9W part is about equal to SV Arrandale GPU.

 

[Concillian]

Wow, a lot of assumptions there in your post. I will wait and see what the official die size figures are.

Also if you really believe that simply a smaller die size for AMD will mean more profit you are mistaken. There are many more factors than simply die size that determines profit.

There is a lot more than die size, and AMD's package all around is more focused on cost than CULV. AT mentioned a BGA 4xx package for the Zacate compared to the BGA 12xx and 9xx packages that Intel uses for their CULV parts. It's a purpose built CPU against one made for the top end of the market and neutered to fit the bottom end. They should be able to put quite a bit of pressure on Intel if they're even close on performance, and they're putting Zacate in front of reviewers and I haven't seen a review that didn't at least say performance was comparable. This thing has to cost less to make than an AM3 Regor and it's set to compete with processors designed for the high end. That's a win for AMD.

CULV is not priced for the low end. They're priced for what the market will bear because there's no real competition. Zacate will be priced for the low end, because that's the only place it can compete.

SB will wipe the floor with Zacate in terms of CPU performance, this is clear. The only uncertainty will be SB's GPU performance vs Zacate's GPU performance.

Why is this clear? I don't think it's clear at all that in the segment they compete, a CULV SB will wipe the floor with Zacate on CPU performance.

A desktop SB will wipe the floor with Zacate on CPU performance, sure, that much is definitely clear. It should. SB was designed for that space. How much will Intel have to cut from their features to meet the TDP requirement on the CULV cores though? Nobody knows at this point, and reviews comparing it to the CULV i5 are favoring Zacate on all fronts. SB will improve upon Arrandale, but how much?

Do we really know that (CULV) SB CPU will wipe the floor with Zacate CPU? I think likely to be more competitive than you're making it out to be.

Complete Zacate benchmarks will be available soon, and then we'll know a lot more. I just hope that next year it's a lot easier to purchase an 18W TDP non-notebook than it is today ($400 ITX boards + $200 CPUs, lol)

 

[veri745]

Thanks for bringing these scores up. How do these numbers relate to both CULV Arrandale GPU and regular voltage Arrandale GPU?

P.S. Does anyone have ideas on what type of silicon these GPUs use? Are the Ontario/Zacate GPUs built on a special low leakage process or do they use the same silicon as discrete Radeons?

As far as I know, Ontario is made using TSMC 40nm, so I would assume that's the same process as the Radeons use.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Why is this clear? I don't think it's clear at all that in the segment they compete, a CULV SB will wipe the floor with Zacate on CPU performance.

Zacate and Ontario underperforms the Nile platform in PCMark Vantage in AMD's own tests even though it has a significantly better GPU.

How is that really better than dual-core Atom?

Cedar Trail: Q4 2011 Atom N series replacement, 32nm

Concillian, I gave that a thought and initially it did not make sense. But Fudzilla is now reporting Q4 2011 for the Cedar Trail platform. I don't know if the rumor is even true, but in the case it means Intel won't have Pine Trail replacement until end of next year. Better single thread performance on the Celeron 743 and HD capable GMA 4500 might be more competitive.

 

[maddie]

The one machine I'd pay well over $600 for Zacate would be a MacBook Air. I'm not convinced Apple will make use of Zacate though. Given the power considerations they'd be fine sticking with Intel ULV non-Atom chips.

Guess you're getting your wish.

http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/20817-apple-to-embrace-amd-fusion