AMD Ontario APU pictured,die size ~77mm^2

[ajaidev]

[IMG]http://cbid.softnology.biz/work/softnology_eOntario_1.png[/s]

[IMG]http://cbid.softnology.biz/work/softnology_eOntario_2.png[/s]

My god no gpu how is that even possible most likely AMD will recycle parts No difference in TDP for dual and single core with GPU.

T48N looks good hell even T40N does not look bad but T24L and T48L cant be called fusion and dont seem worth it in the consumer market maybe servers are their calling.

[smut]

This looks very interesting.

[Kej]

My god no gpu how is that even possible most likely AMD will recycle parts No difference in TDP for dual and single core with GPU.

T48N looks good hell even T40N does not look bad but T24L and T48L cant be called fusion and dont seem worth it in the consumer market maybe servers are their calling.

Wouldn't there be a reason they're calling it eOntario?

Do you always need a fast gpu in your NAS-box or Casino slot-machine?

The time in production, 6 years with a possibility of 8 years and support up to
the year 2018 tells me that it isn't average Joe's netbook thats the target of
these slides.

Edit: After looking at this, the slot-machine perhaps is what really needs a fast gpu

Whatever, my belief is that these slides is from AMD's AES Division FWIW YMMV etc etc.

[w0mbat]

eOntario = embeddedOntario

and this charts looks quiet good. 2 OoO 1ghz cores w/ gpu @9w tdp

[SimBy]

Whats the difference between eOntario for embedded and Ontario for netbooks and low power notebooks.

[Kej]

Whats the difference between eOntario for embedded and Ontario for netbooks and low power notebooks.

Unknown at the moment. Perhaps there isn't any difference, perhaps it is.

We will know in due time, thats my hope at least.

[savantu]

My god no gpu how is that even possible most likely AMD will recycle parts No difference in TDP for dual and single core with GPU.

T48N looks good hell even T40N does not look bad but T24L and T48L cant be called fusion and dont seem worth it in the consumer market maybe servers are their calling.

How can they look good ? Those frequencies and TDPs are pathetic.

40nm Ontario w/o GPU at 800Mhz has a TDP of 5w. The original Atom, Silverthorne, had 0.65w TDP at 800 MHz. Talk about an order of magnitude between them. ARM chips will eat it alive and it doesn't even manage to get close to Atom in small form factors.

[cegras]

At what speed? The atom is still a truly pathetic chip, scrolling in excel with a few windows up is jerky.

[AliG]

How can they look good ? Those frequencies and TDPs are pathetic.

40nm Ontario w/o GPU at 800Mhz has a TDP of 5w. The original Atom, Silverthorne, had 0.65w TDP at 800 MHz. Talk about an order of magnitude between them. ARM chips will eat it alive and it doesn't even manage to get close to Atom in small form factors.

yes and the original atom also sucked in terms of performance. If Bobcat can provide the predicted 90% of core 2 processing power, then who cares if the TDP is a watt or two more? Besides you're not including chipset, as the entire circuitry for atom ended up being very close to the AMD offering despite AMD using a much older chip design

[madcho]

How can they look good ? Those frequencies and TDPs are pathetic.

40nm Ontario w/o GPU at 800Mhz has a TDP of 5w. The original Atom, Silverthorne, had 0.65w TDP at 800 MHz. Talk about an order of magnitude between them. ARM chips will eat it alive and it doesn't even manage to get close to Atom in small form factors.

ontario include northbridge. Atom have a very power hungry northbridge, so even it's sub 1watt, it's same power range than ontario, without GPU performances, and cpu very very weak.

So ontario is a good deal.

[Mechanical Man]

How can they look good ? Those frequencies and TDPs are pathetic.

40nm Ontario w/o GPU at 800Mhz has a TDP of 5w. The original Atom, Silverthorne, had 0.65w TDP at 800 MHz. Talk about an order of magnitude between them. ARM chips will eat it alive and it doesn't even manage to get close to Atom in small form factors.

And was that Atom listed as having 0,65W TDP? No i think not. Same with these ontario chips, listed TDP is bin TDP they will most likely be lower than bin TDP. Also remember you get two bobcat cores @1GHz + gpu at 9W TDP. It is fuking awesome. That 18W part for HTPC thank you. nVidia ION will be eaten alive.

[Manicdan]

i think ill be picking up a 9W tdp duel core 1ghz with gpu netbook for some nice HTPC/torrent machine lovin.

[Manabu]

Also, don't forget that the 800mhhz atom didn't had hyperthreading, so it is even slower than an regular atom. Anyway, those new TDPs look high and a bit strange...

[Hornet331]

And was that Atom listed as having 0,65W TDP? No i think not. Same with these ontario chips, listed TDP is bin TDP they will most likely be lower than bin TDP. Also remember you get two bobcat cores @1GHz + gpu at 9W TDP. It is fuking awesome. That 18W part for HTPC thank you. nVidia ION will be eaten alive.

Z500.
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=35472
and it had HT.

The Z560 (2,13ghz) had 2,5W TDP and combined with the intented UL11/US15 SCH it was possible to build a platform with below 5W. Compared to that, the new atoms suck ass.

[Mechanical Man]

Well thats nice tdp. Compared to ontario, thats graphics and cpu power sucks ass bigtime.

[The Coolest]

Z500.
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=35472
and it had HT.

The Z560 (2,13ghz) had 2,5W TDP and combined with the intented UL11/US15 SCH it was possible to build a platform with below 5W. Compared to that, the new atoms suck ass.

The TDP is very nice, but...
The chips don't support 64bit instruction set at all.
The graphics performance is next to non-existant.
It is not capable of decoding all HD content in hardware, just 720P IIRC.
The CPU speed will probably still suck for general use, even at that high a clock speed.
The price of the CPU and chipset is much higher than the D and N series Atoms.

Besides the Z series is intended to go into MIDs and other such devices, not netbooks\nettops (although some come with such chips).

[-Sweeper_]

1.0ghz dual-core is the top for >10w models?

[The Coolest]

To be completely honest, I'm kind of underwhelmed about that as well.
1ghz is just not going to cut it in my opinion.
The 1.6ghz parts should be enough for real low power HTPCs, but too power hungry for netbooks.

[Manicdan]

To be completely honest, I'm kind of underwhelmed about that as well.
1ghz is just not going to cut it in my opinion.
The 1.6ghz parts should be enough for real low power HTPCs, but too power hungry for netbooks.

theres alot more to it than just TDP,
if you can get a 1.6ghz and 1ghz to run at the same power in idle, then your battery life will be great for both options, just one will have alot more power when you want it, at a cost that drains by a similar increase

basically if both options of bobcat can convert 12 hours of video, but one does it in 5 hours before the battery dies, and one does it in 8 hours, you still get the same workload/watt, just one is faster at it (keep in mind that was a fake example)

im going to wait for some reviews first, if idle power is the same between chips, then ill go with the fastest one.

[The Coolest]

I agree with you on that.
I have a CULV (SU7300) laptop. I put an SSD in it since the stock 5400 rpm harddrive is slow as crap. I easily get 10 hours on the battery, if I don't stress the processor too much.
But usually smaller and lower costs platforms come with a much weaker battery. When the difference at full load is x2 the effect on battery life could be much bigger than your example. And 1GHz is still too slow in by book, that should put it around a dual core Atom 330 performance wise, which is not that great.
One more thing to consider is cooling. I haven't really tried put a very long lasting load on the CPU in my laptop, but in normal usage, it runs very cool. When you double the power consumption, the heat output increases by leaps and bounds, so that's something worth thinking about. For example, I have a first gen eeePC, it's just a 630MHz Celeron M, but the power hungry chipset causes it to be unusable on the lap for long, it just gets too damn hot, if I had the option to cut the amount of power consumed by half or even a third, it'd probably wouldn't be too bad.

[nn_step]

I agree with you on that.
I have a CULV (SU7300) laptop. I put an SSD in it since the stock 5400 rpm harddrive is slow as crap. I easily get 10 hours on the battery, if I don't stress the processor too much.
But usually smaller and lower costs platforms come with a much weaker battery. When the difference at full load is x2 the effect on battery life could be much bigger than your example. And 1GHz is still too slow in by book, that should put it around a dual core Atom 330 performance wise, which is not that great.
One more thing to consider is cooling. I haven't really tried put a very long lasting load on the CPU in my laptop, but in normal usage, it runs very cool. When you double the power consumption, the heat output increases by leaps and bounds, so that's something worth thinking about. For example, I have a first gen eeePC, it's just a 630MHz Celeron M, but the power hungry chipset causes it to be unusable on the lap for long, it just gets too damn hot, if I had the option to cut the amount of power consumed by half or even a third, it'd probably wouldn't be too bad.

One would think, one of these days one manufacture would use OpenBIOS and include the options for undervolting; at absolutely ZERO cost and ZERO risk.

While giving power Users like us the ability to improve our user experience and battery life at the same time.

[savantu]

The TDP is very nice, but...
The chips don't support 64bit instruction set at all.

You don't need that at all in MIDs/tablets/netbooks.

The graphics performance is next to non-existant.

People always complain about the graphics. Have you heard the term "good enough" ? Atom is no worse than existing solutions in the same envelope.
Yeah, Ontario is much faster, problem is you can't use it in those form factors because faster needs much more power also. So a fail.

It is not capable of decoding all HD content in hardware, just 720P IIRC.

And who gives a about "all HD" content excepts those who only argue for 's sake ?
720P is plenty "good enough" for those small form factors. Besides, the new generations launched this summer can do 1080P decoding and 720P recording. Somehow, you appear to have missed that.

Why don't you also complain it doesn't have Dolby 3D surround ?

The CPU speed will probably still suck for general use, even at that high a clock speed.

"Will probably" ? I bet 100% of the users who wine hear about Atom have not used it. Mark my words : it is good enough for general use as long as you have the 1 or 2 GB versions with Win XP.
Words, Firefox, Winamp, messenger programs work perfectly fine and with HT it is smooth enough. That's why people bought the damn thing in the first place. They don't expect Blu Ray playback ( who watches that quality on a 7-10" screen ?! ) or the run video encoding. At most they upload photos or short movies from their cameras or cellphones. Again, enough HP for that.

The price of the CPU and chipset is much higher than the D and N series Atoms.

Perfectly normal given its rarity ( few CPUs can boast such features )

Besides the Z series is intended to go into MIDs and other such devices, not netbooks\nettops (although some come with such chips).

You're talking about a CPU released over 2 year ago.

Besides, you seem stuck in the original Atom from 2008. We're in 2010 and guess what, there is a new generation in the market.

Intel launched the Moorestown generation 3 months ago. It is a system on a chip with CPU,GPU, IMC and NB and can reach 1.5GHz for smartphones and 1.9Ghz for tablets/netbooks with full HD 1080P decoding and 720P recording.

[flippin_waffles]

Graphics is and is going to be much more important than apparantley you realize. GPU acceleration is just around the corner. Since that is the direction the entire industry is headed, i'd say intel might be in trouble. Fusion doesn't just play games well.

[-Boris-]

I wonder, if Atom was AMDs product and Ontario Intels. Would Savantu be of the same opinion regarding the two chips? And would he bring up the same points?

[savantu]

I wonder, if Atom was AMDs product and Ontario Intels. Would Savantu be of the same opinion regarding the two chips? And would he bring up the same points?

Certainly. Bobcat isn't living at all to the hype you and others have created. Where is the sub 1w CPU that informal was bragging about ?

Atom has other weakpoints, but it isn't anything more than Intel claimed to be. Intel sucks at GPUs, they are weak, but nowhere did they brag about playing games on Atom. The message constantly revolved around surfing the web and light office stuff. IMO, they delivered that.

OTOH, they are utterly incapable of making inroads into smartphones. And that is a major fail since mids and netbooks will be replaced by smartphones. They are a niche with a limited lifespan. Atom might be way lower power than Bobcat, but even so it is 3-4x higher than ARM chips ( altough it also offers more performance ). Again, same stuff as with Bobcat : it doesn't matter it has more performance if you can't stuck it in the right form factor.

Graphics is and is going to be much more important than apparantley you realize. GPU acceleration is just around the corner. Since that is the direction the entire industry is headed, i'd say intel might be in trouble. Fusion doesn't just play games well.

Could be. But they are trying to cut corners with the ill fated Larrabee ( altough they have some projects to use the GMAs as accelerators with OpenCL and others ). Basically, Intel is saying : "screw the GPU as the accelerator. We will morph it in the CPU." Secondly, AMD has yet to prove something with Fusion ( which is what 3 years late ? ). Everything is powerpoint at the moment.
Whether they will manage it or not is another discussion and off-topic to this thread.