AMD's Answer to Intel Atom or AMD UVC

[Shintai]

well if it was you might as well post any prove here too. Cos it's a surprise for me.



CeleronM + 945G - now that's a performance king

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...lfdale_11.html

SURPRISE SURPRISE COOPER! Abit far from 65W aint it? Both 65 and 45nm.

Oh, and compared to teh above. Yes a Celeron M would be a performance king. But then again, so would a 1.33Ghz 10W C2D.

[Cooper]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...lfdale_11.html

SURPRISE SURPRISE COOPER! Abit far from 65W aint it? Both 65 and 45nm.

Oh, and compared to teh above. Yes a Celeron M would be a performance king. But then again, so would a 1.33Ghz 10W C2D.

you comparing power consumption of 65W Vs 125W chip.
that's not what i was asking for nor what is discussed in this topic.
Early morning for you there?

[Shintai]

you comparing power consumption of 65W Vs 125W chip.
that's not what i was asking for nor what is discussed in this topic.
Early morning for you there?

Ignore the AMD CPU. it doesnt matter and its just some poor excuse on your part. Now tell me instead. How are those 4 Intel CPUs vs their TDP?

Let's see:


AMD does rate and use max. TDP for its desktop lineup(unlike ACP for server parts).Next i said it is unlike intel since we are not sure,even today,how intel does come up with their numbers(they use that internal burn-in tool i suppose).
I also said :"not to say that 45nm 65W consumes 65W though" which means intel's 45nm parts usually use less power than rated,which is also known for a while.Hence i said the rating on the box is for "cooling reference".
So please tell me what was wrong or incorrect in my post.And please don't skip an answer or just say "Ehmm no" when you are cornered,you do this "Hit&run" too many times it is not even funny.

The same applies for 65nm CPUs. Try read the link I gave. 115W for a 125W AMD CPU, 50W tops for a 65W Intel CPU. It doesnt take much math skills to see who is closest to their max TDP value. Both in raw W and in percentage.

[BakerT]

Cant wait for the reviews. Im looking for a low watt system for a router/NAS/Print/whatever setup.

You just love the AMD threads huh Shintai?

[Cooper]

Ignore the AMD CPU. it doesnt matter and its just some poor excuse on your part. Now tell me instead. How are those 4 Intel CPUs vs their TDP?

My initial question was about the methods of measuring TDP, not relevance to actual power consumption which is pointless as irev mentioned.

[Rammsteiner]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...lfdale_11.html

SURPRISE SURPRISE COOPER! Abit far from 65W aint it? Both 65 and 45nm.

Second, I posted this more (getting tired of repeating it), we had this TDP vs ACP discussion a while back and I posted quite some interesting links there where as everyone went silent on. And yet you dare to continue posting about it stating you're right... I might have missed something epicly here.

Re-reading the links I posted shows Intel's TDP is not the max. Actually it seems they pull their numbers out of 'nowhere'. Sometimes being spot on (which is still higher percentage wise then AMD's real TDP), also they've a lower TDP than they'll ever pull as in your example... But as well, actually rate the TDP too low. So Im really wondering what your point exactly was.