Actually it is now thanks to the new 3150 integrated video card. Is it good enough for games? Doubtful, and its 1080p performance really depends on the video format and bit-rate, but even if the prices are lower, it doesn't look like the watts are lower and we need bench marks first to see the performance.
Uh, no it can't. The GMA 3150 has slightly better MPEG acceleration than the GMA 950. When Intel demonstrated the ultra-thin Canoe Lake reference platform, they mentioned that the dual core N550 allows it to play 720p.
Intel GMA 3150 graphics max out at 720p for H.264 video and 480p for flash video but not smoothly at full screen for flash and can stutter at times on H.264 video.
I have been using my netbook for two years now, and I am starting to look for a replacement. Dual core is a must, as I cant justify an upgrade that does not bring a significant performance bump, and as small a screen as I can get with 1330x768. (The only real complaint I have with my old asus is the 600 vertical resolution.) Are the benchies likely to start rolling in soon?
I heard Ontario is about 1.5GHz and 2x the speed of Atom, both integer and floating point. But it is skeptical that AMD can outperform Intel this much. I do wish it is true though.
Probably 2x as fast is a best case scenario. Being a more complete CPU, it will probably just be more responsive. I'm sure it won't beat Atom in every aspect, but the superior GPU acceleration will really give it some zip in Windows 7 and HD decoding. It's what we've needed in netbooks for a while now.
CULV Core2Duo 1024x768 12" and only marginally thicker/heavier than a netbook old school thinkpad build quality
If you want to save you can go down a notch to the older X60s, I have a X60s (with CoreDuo not C2D) and it thrashes any netbook due to the 'real' CPU, despite the anemic GMA950, I don't game on it anyway and the CPU is good enough to push 720p in software. It runs Win7 quick.
Or you can splash out and get the T variant for tablet computing.
should be able to get it used for same price as a high end netbook (this was a 3k laptop when it came out ~3 years ago)
It's likely that Zacate at 1.6GHz+ will beat any old <1.4GHz Core 2 Duo based CULV CPU in most tasks, from the benchmarks that have leaked so far.
And 1024-wide - barely usable these days.
Battery life is an important factor for a netbook - would an old CULV Core 2 Duo laptop still have good battery life after three years? And no warranty. The costs and risks just aren't worth it for some people.
As an aside, the deprecation on the X61s is terrible.
Is there a big difference in GPU architecture between general 3D performance and video decoding? I would think so. I think this chip should purely target decoding and forget about 3D performance.
I expect that's exactly what AMD will do: target decoding and provide very basic 3D. GPU performance will probably be somewhere between the 890GX chipset (aka HD 4290) and the Radeon HD 5450.
It should definitely have the raw power - from the die shot it is obvious that GPU is almost half of it. Where it gets tricky is the memory bandwidth - here I expect a bottleneck so more like mainstream to low end 5450. So no gaming on 1920 screens but should be pretty decent for the sub-WXGA screens of the target market.
Basically Sandy 12 IGP in an Atom-class APU. And, most importantly, with compatible drivers.
Don't forget the northbridge functions, the PCIe controller, the memory controller, the bus interfaces which seem to be 20% of the CPU, and UVD3 decode/encode which is now nearly a separate unit from the GPU portions.
"Ontario's TDP is competitive. Intel's recently announced Atom N550 (dual-core Pine Trail) with on-die graphics has an 8.5W TDP, but it should be significantly slower than Ontario if AMD did its job right. "
So they moved the graphics on-die instead of just on-package? Or was it only on-package for the desktop variants?
So, competitive TDP in both cases, performance probably beating Atom very nicely, and price probably rather less than Core i3. Graphics performance should be at least equal performance, and potentially more mature in terms of features and drivers. I'm willing to bet that AMD have properly integrated the two so that they can share the full memory bandwidth from an on-die memory controller nicely.
Atom's graphics core is indeed now on-die, but via a standard bus link rather than sharing a tighter connection. This hurts performance because they have to share the memory controller in a suboptimal way. The revised version of ION also suffers from having only a single PCIe lane, instead of being able to use a full Northbridge status.
I fully expect Bobcat to deliver a better user experience on a netbook than Atom. However, the netbook craze is pretty much over now - CULV laptops and ultraportables just make more sense for a tiny price premium, and an 18W Core i3 Arrandale would completely demolish any Bobcat.
The only space I can see big growth opportunities for Bobcat is in slim tablets, and they'd be saddled with a bloated OS (Win7) compared to Cortex A9s running iOS or Android. Maybe Meego might take off, and maybe pigs will fly, too :P.
AMD came fully dressed to the prom, but the party may have been over already.
Do you think there is a small price premium from a CULV to an Atom? Fine for you But thats not what the average customer thinks You can call it netbook, nettop, latptop, ultraportable, lowend desktop whatever. Bobat is going to eat the largest share of these markets, until Intel releases new low cost Atom.
" Intel's ultra-low voltage Core i3 has an 18W TDP, but the CPU should be much faster than a pair of Bobcats."
Intel's 18W Core i3 runs at 1.2GHz (a fact that was mysteriously omitted). It would only require a 1.6GHz Bobcat to become roughly equivalent given Bobcat's performance figures leaked so far (~90% of equivalent clocked Core 2 Duo in Int, ~80% in FP, we won't even discuss the figures against Atom).
Secondly, cost is a major factor - how costly is a CULV Core i3 for an OEM to integrate, versus a ~74mm^2 Zacate?
Thirdly, an 80SP DX11 GPU with OpenCL support is going to make the Arrandale graphics look terrible, never mind having some half decent drivers to go with them.
Since AMD and Intel are obligated to share their x86 patents with each other, then integrating ATI technologies into x86 would enable Intel to use ATI licenses?
Nope. The graphics are not an extension of the x86 instruction set. When AMD took x86 and extended it to support 64bits with x86-64, then yes, Intel got that.
Putting something on the same die is not the same as adding it to the x86 instruction set.
Ontario looks like it is meant to compete with the ULV chips and will likely be a more attractive option, with the better integrated video and possibly battery life. Atom was an attractive marketing tool that Intel needs to kill. Performance sucks and there is little profit in it.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
30 Comments
Back to Article
adonn78 - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
Lowers prices. Plus Atom is not powerful enough for streaming HD video.quiksilvr - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
Actually it is now thanks to the new 3150 integrated video card. Is it good enough for games? Doubtful, and its 1080p performance really depends on the video format and bit-rate, but even if the prices are lower, it doesn't look like the watts are lower and we need bench marks first to see the performance.IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
Uh, no it can't. The GMA 3150 has slightly better MPEG acceleration than the GMA 950. When Intel demonstrated the ultra-thin Canoe Lake reference platform, they mentioned that the dual core N550 allows it to play 720p.wazzap123 - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link
There's a good analysis over the daily circuit that covers why Ontario and Zacate are essentially the corollary to "good enough computing" -http://www.dailycircuitry.com/2010/11/age-of-good-...
xavier78 - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
3150 really can't go the HD streaming...it's the Broadcom accelerator chip that does that for ya ;-)Kamen75 - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
Intel GMA 3150 graphics max out at 720p for H.264 video and 480p for flash video but not smoothly at full screen for flash and can stutter at times on H.264 video.Springfield45 - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
I have been using my netbook for two years now, and I am starting to look for a replacement. Dual core is a must, as I cant justify an upgrade that does not bring a significant performance bump, and as small a screen as I can get with 1330x768. (The only real complaint I have with my old asus is the 600 vertical resolution.)Are the benchies likely to start rolling in soon?
mianmian - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
I heard Ontario is about 1.5GHz and 2x the speed of Atom, both integer and floating point. But it is skeptical that AMD can outperform Intel this much. I do wish it is true though.MonkeyPaw - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
Probably 2x as fast is a best case scenario. Being a more complete CPU, it will probably just be more responsive. I'm sure it won't beat Atom in every aspect, but the superior GPU acceleration will really give it some zip in Windows 7 and HD decoding. It's what we've needed in netbooks for a while now.wintermute000 - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
Dude forget netbook, get a used IBM X61sCULV Core2Duo
1024x768
12" and only marginally thicker/heavier than a netbook
old school thinkpad build quality
If you want to save you can go down a notch to the older X60s, I have a X60s (with CoreDuo not C2D) and it thrashes any netbook due to the 'real' CPU, despite the anemic GMA950, I don't game on it anyway and the CPU is good enough to push 720p in software. It runs Win7 quick.
Or you can splash out and get the T variant for tablet computing.
should be able to get it used for same price as a high end netbook (this was a 3k laptop when it came out ~3 years ago)
psychobriggsy - Wednesday, September 8, 2010 - link
It's likely that Zacate at 1.6GHz+ will beat any old <1.4GHz Core 2 Duo based CULV CPU in most tasks, from the benchmarks that have leaked so far.And 1024-wide - barely usable these days.
Battery life is an important factor for a netbook - would an old CULV Core 2 Duo laptop still have good battery life after three years? And no warranty. The costs and risks just aren't worth it for some people.
As an aside, the deprecation on the X61s is terrible.
krumme - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
Post by Hans de Vries, official BOINC numbers:http://www.semiaccurate.com/forums/showpost.php?p=...
Note the results is from early silicon bobcat.
Conroe 2.13GHz
Int. 4375 FP 2079
Read thread here for pics and die explanation:
http://www.semiaccurate.com/forums/showthread.php?...
AnnonymousCoward - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
Is there a big difference in GPU architecture between general 3D performance and video decoding? I would think so. I think this chip should purely target decoding and forget about 3D performance.JGabriel - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
I expect that's exactly what AMD will do: target decoding and provide very basic 3D. GPU performance will probably be somewhere between the 890GX chipset (aka HD 4290) and the Radeon HD 5450..
tatertot - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
ht tp://www.com puterbase.de/bilds trecke/30669/6/(remove spaces, stupid spam filter)
Coin is 23.25 mm in diameter.
Carefully comparing, not counting the extra adhesive around the die, gets you a part that is about 9.88 mm wide x 8.53 mm high, or:
~84 mm2
R3MF - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
is there any indication that the GPU will be equivalent to a 5470 as suggested here?http://jedibeeftrix.wordpress.com/2010/08/28/redef...
mino - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
It should definitely have the raw power - from the die shot it is obvious that GPU is almost half of it.Where it gets tricky is the memory bandwidth - here I expect a bottleneck so more like mainstream to low end 5450. So no gaming on 1920 screens but should be pretty decent for the sub-WXGA screens of the target market.
Basically Sandy 12 IGP in an Atom-class APU. And, most importantly, with compatible drivers.
lashton - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
The GPU is actually about 75% of it, if they removed the integrated GPU you would have an extremely small CPU!psychobriggsy - Wednesday, September 8, 2010 - link
Don't forget the northbridge functions, the PCIe controller, the memory controller, the bus interfaces which seem to be 20% of the CPU, and UVD3 decode/encode which is now nearly a separate unit from the GPU portions.Stuka87 - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
AMD may be late to the game with a competitive NetBook chip, but better late than, well, really late.But if the GPU performance turns out to be as good as it looks, it could really give Intel a run in the Netbook space.
blckgrffn - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
Because we need SC2 capable netbooks.I am serious. I need this.
sprockkets - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
"Ontario's TDP is competitive. Intel's recently announced Atom N550 (dual-core Pine Trail) with on-die graphics has an 8.5W TDP, but it should be significantly slower than Ontario if AMD did its job right. "So they moved the graphics on-die instead of just on-package? Or was it only on-package for the desktop variants?
chromatix - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - link
So, competitive TDP in both cases, performance probably beating Atom very nicely, and price probably rather less than Core i3. Graphics performance should be at least equal performance, and potentially more mature in terms of features and drivers. I'm willing to bet that AMD have properly integrated the two so that they can share the full memory bandwidth from an on-die memory controller nicely.Atom's graphics core is indeed now on-die, but via a standard bus link rather than sharing a tighter connection. This hurts performance because they have to share the memory controller in a suboptimal way. The revised version of ION also suffers from having only a single PCIe lane, instead of being able to use a full Northbridge status.
krumme - Wednesday, September 8, 2010 - link
Look here for core floorplan explanations and asumptions:http://www.semiaccurate.com/forums/showpost.php?p=...
Voldenuit - Wednesday, September 8, 2010 - link
I fully expect Bobcat to deliver a better user experience on a netbook than Atom. However, the netbook craze is pretty much over now - CULV laptops and ultraportables just make more sense for a tiny price premium, and an 18W Core i3 Arrandale would completely demolish any Bobcat.The only space I can see big growth opportunities for Bobcat is in slim tablets, and they'd be saddled with a bloated OS (Win7) compared to Cortex A9s running iOS or Android. Maybe Meego might take off, and maybe pigs will fly, too :P.
AMD came fully dressed to the prom, but the party may have been over already.
krumme - Wednesday, September 8, 2010 - link
Do you think there is a small price premium from a CULV to an Atom?Fine for you
But thats not what the average customer thinks
You can call it netbook, nettop, latptop, ultraportable, lowend desktop whatever. Bobat is going to eat the largest share of these markets, until Intel releases new low cost Atom.
psychobriggsy - Wednesday, September 8, 2010 - link
" Intel's ultra-low voltage Core i3 has an 18W TDP, but the CPU should be much faster than a pair of Bobcats."Intel's 18W Core i3 runs at 1.2GHz (a fact that was mysteriously omitted). It would only require a 1.6GHz Bobcat to become roughly equivalent given Bobcat's performance figures leaked so far (~90% of equivalent clocked Core 2 Duo in Int, ~80% in FP, we won't even discuss the figures against Atom).
Secondly, cost is a major factor - how costly is a CULV Core i3 for an OEM to integrate, versus a ~74mm^2 Zacate?
Thirdly, an 80SP DX11 GPU with OpenCL support is going to make the Arrandale graphics look terrible, never mind having some half decent drivers to go with them.
marraco - Wednesday, September 8, 2010 - link
Since AMD and Intel are obligated to share their x86 patents with each other, then integrating ATI technologies into x86 would enable Intel to use ATI licenses?then nVidia is in trouble.
Mr Perfect - Wednesday, September 8, 2010 - link
Nope. The graphics are not an extension of the x86 instruction set. When AMD took x86 and extended it to support 64bits with x86-64, then yes, Intel got that.Putting something on the same die is not the same as adding it to the x86 instruction set.
sleepeeg3 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Ontario looks like it is meant to compete with the ULV chips and will likely be a more attractive option, with the better integrated video and possibly battery life. Atom was an attractive marketing tool that Intel needs to kill. Performance sucks and there is little profit in it.