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

[savantu]

Anyone want to bet that Savantu owns Intel stock?
..

i'll bet $1 that I don't. Accepted ?

Yep, clearly Ontario is already Epic Fail. It's not sub 1 watt and thats just a disgrace. Performance won't matter because we know its AMD and that is automatic fail, especially anything remotely related to BD arch. (as we know from its proven horribly lower IPC).
If I'm not buying it (because it fails) nobody else will.

Yeah, the Atom killer ended squarely in the 9-20w range, just where single and dual core SB will be.

He is financial analysist, most probably focused on Intel so yes, it's more than clear that he does. Thats what makes this all so worthless. People aren't arguing just for the sake of the truth, but the sake of money and profession. It gets bloody when money is involved, as seen with the overclocking scene. Same happens here. There was one fanboy who even admited that he had Intel stock which fed his passion.

It's waste of time to argue with someone who refuses to take a neutral stance on the subject. Which is understandable though; Intel's failures don't bring him the bread and the butter, Intel's success does.

As always, when don't have anything intelligent to say attack the person. Easier.

^^ Add on that that llano is c*ap too,being indefinitely slower than SB on CPU side,having GPU that is "obviously" memory BW starved and being delayed a year+ .
This concludes the joke section for today

The joke is on you. I could dig some older posts of yours on Ontario and Llano and show how certain you were of their features and schedules.
It would be more than embarrassing, but hey, most here have shorter memories than a squirrel and fail to connect what was discussed weeks and months ago to what is happening now.
One even asked "where is the Llano delay, AMD said it was planned for 2011 ?"...
No wonder why the human specie is in danger. Most have their gray cells in permanent C6 state.

Why are you predicting Bobcat's performance? How can you be sure that a 1.5Ghz Atom will compare to a 1Ghz Bobcat? My guess is that the Bobcat at 1Ghz will be faster than the 1.5Ghz Atom, so in your Case #1, AMD would have superior performance + superior GPU for the same power. Clear win I would say?

Because I can. And my prediction is up to 50% faster clock per clock. What's yours so we can revisit this in 4 months and see who was right ?

Also, its apparent that the disabled cores and GPU's are sucking power, or they are just worse binned with higher voltages. See the single core Bobcat: 1.5Ghz 18W. Dual core without GPU: 1.4Ghz 18W. Makes no sense when there is a 1.6ghz Bobcat + GPU for 18W.

Since parts are power gated, no they shouldn't be using any power.
Did you happen to have heard by any chance of the concept of having different CPU bins ?
You see, not all parts have the same power characteristics. You have parts which are leakier and more power hungry. Instead of tossing them away, you put them in another TDP range. That's why some single cores will burn a lot of power, but instead of being discarded they are sold at a discount in a higher TDP range.

It seems fairly obvious that the ontario lineup posted and atom lineup extend into different market segments. They overlap in the middle where high-end Atom and low-end Ontario meet. But mostly it looks like AMD is targeting these first chips to fill the gulf between Atom and CULV that Intel has left open. It should be a nice boost to all those disgustingly slow netbooks and tablets.

If AMD is working on a sub 1W design, it clearly isn't in this lineup. It might not be ready, need a new process, or whatever. But if I was AMD I wouldn't be to eager to enter that sector of the market anyway because ARM is going to eat x86 alive.

This forum would definitely need at least a dozen posters like ^^. Otherwise, it is just crawling in the primeval slime from an intelectual POV.

a few things,
first a bobcat cpu with no gpu does not sound like something we would see in consumer products like netbooks, it has to get a gpu from somewhere else, so why get a single core, power sucking chip, in a devise that runs on a battery. sounds like they have a special purpose that we wouldnt see in conventional forms.

second, a single core with gpu is 9W, a duel core with gpu is also 9W, the difference is a 200mhz drop to add that second cpu. sounds like its pretty low power to me. the fact everything is 5 or 9 or 18 watts makes it really tough to infer any exact power consumption per core.

Did you happen, by any chance, to hear about wafer defects ? You see, wafers have a thing called defect density. When you have a defect, instead of throwing away that die, you could disable, let's say, the GPU if the defect was located there.

no. paul is an experienced engineer who knows his stuff although he is biased.

savantu is an experienced shill who cant help it when he takes things out of context.

Yeah, I'm taking things out of context. Probably because of me Bobcat can't touch handhelds and low power stuff even with a 10 ft pole. Then again, Llano being delayed to the summer by AMD's own admission is another thing taken out of context. Probably they feel no need to hurry up and save what can be saved from corporate refresh cycle.

Shills are also apologists and deniers of reality. A category where many would find a perfect fit.

one for the intel fanboys who are arguing the fact of the impossible 1W bobcat powerdraw.... an official amd slide

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...rformance.html

and aimed for following market:

“[Ontario] is a dual-core system-on-chip implementation and APU of the upcoming “Bobcat” core for ultrathin notebooks, netbooks and <20W new market products. Ontario is designed to offer a performance PC experience in a low-power design,”

so pls stop all speculation and compares, all are based on assumptions

So, we have the slide which says "sub 1w capable". Too bad they forgot to show that slide to the design team. Maybe, then, they would have made it in-order.