Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD's Response to Atom

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 6, 2009 10:57:27 AM

http://gizmodo.com/5124141/hp-pavilion-dv2-notebook-is-...

Well, now we know why AMD's stock went up 30% in the last couple days.

The project formerly code-named "Yukon" has come to fruition, to compete with Intel's Atom platform. First chip: Athlon Neo MV-40 processor at 1.6 Ghz. Comes standard with X1250 graphics, and optional Radeon HD 3410 graphics. HP's DV2 (above link) based on the platform is expected to retail at $600-800.

And just the other day AMD was saying they weren't going to compete in that bracket.... sneaky sneaky.

More about : amd response atom

January 6, 2009 11:22:56 AM

Naw, theyre the same ol AMD, nothing new going on there, heheh
a b à CPUs
January 6, 2009 11:40:58 AM

Good for AMD, any ways what's the performance like for that chip?
Related resources
January 6, 2009 11:46:20 AM

Looking for it, so far havnt seen anything, just the 22watt one, not the lower powered ones
January 6, 2009 12:05:30 PM

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2009/01/06/amd-athlon-...

Platform is ultra thin.. and apparently has a total system TDP of 27W. The CPU itself is 15W, 1.6 Ghz, 512k L2 cache, 64k L1.

It's meant to fill the gap between the Atom notebooks (which don't offer a lot of power), and more expensive full-blown laptops.... but retain at least adequate processing performance, good graphics, and a small form factor. It's less powerful than a core 2 duo 1.6 ghz, but much more powerful than the Atom.
a b à CPUs
January 6, 2009 12:17:29 PM

^Yup. A perfect spot that AMD should dominate for the lack of competition.
January 6, 2009 12:19:44 PM

The duals are expected later on, with the better chipset, and like Atom, the first ones arent optimal, but again like Atom, theyre set to improve, looks interesting
January 6, 2009 12:21:54 PM

Shadow703793 said:
^Yup. A perfect spot that AMD should dominate for the lack of competition.


And where are they gonna make them?

Word, Playa.
January 6, 2009 12:26:00 PM

HP is currently making them for now, after theyd asked Intel for permission for a larger solution for Atom
January 6, 2009 12:28:09 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
HP is currently making them for now, after theyd asked Intel for permission for a larger solution for Atom


Which fab has the excess capacity at this point to spit these out?

Word, Playa.
January 6, 2009 12:31:11 PM

"Which fab has the excess capacity at this point to spit these out?"

New Jersey
January 6, 2009 12:31:35 PM

That I dont know, hopefully itll be tight
January 6, 2009 1:13:35 PM

Is the "AMD Athlon Neo MV-40" a whole new chip - or an existing low power X2 with a core disabled?
January 6, 2009 1:49:13 PM

jamesgoddard said:
Is the "AMD Athlon Neo MV-40" a whole new chip - or an existing low power X2 with a core disabled?


I'm pretty sure it's based on the single core Athlon 64 line... with a die shrink to 65nm.
January 6, 2009 1:50:16 PM

They've been losing money for two years. I'd think capacity is an issue of excess, not a limitation. That is, they have a mountain of 126mm^2 Brisbane dies that consumers ignored for Core 2.

Selling them at Atom prices would net something, but still rather little, and Intel would close the market with a real mobile chipset. Aiming for a slightly more expensive, higher-performance market while tweaking down power consumption makes them more money overall.
January 6, 2009 2:10:57 PM

not a very attractive price point. i would say most people willing to spend 6-8 hundred dollars will bite the bullet and get a laptop rather than a netbook for that price range. the draw to netbook's is the affordability first and foremost. then you have an external media drive, most likely built in card reader, larger storage capacity. stupid if you ask me.
January 6, 2009 2:52:34 PM

Missing the point. Here is a rough little table:

1. Netbook - 1-3lbs - <$500 - 500MHz x1 performance
2. Budget laptop - 7-9lbs - $700 - 1.5GHz x2 performance
3. Ultraportable - 2-3lbs - $2500 - 1.5GHz x2 performance
4. Desktop replacement - 8-11lbs - $1500+ - 2GHz+ x2 performance
5. Lima-based DV2 - 4lbs - $700 - 1.2GHz x1 performance

Not a terribly large market, but it's definitely there. It's 80% as portable as an ultraportable and, for many uses, gives 80% of the performance, for 1/3 the price. A regular laptop is 40% as portable, 100% the performance, and 1/3 the price. This DV2 is not nearly the performance sacrifice of a netbook, but you get most of the portability back. In other words, it responds to both portability and performance complaints without going all the way with exotic parts.

Malovane said:
I'm pretty sure it's based on the single core Athlon 64 line... with a die shrink to 65nm.

AMD has had single-core A64's at 65nm since Feb. 2007; they use the Lima core (122m transistors, 77.2 mm^2), though they probably mix deactivated Brisbanes in there without telling us. All 3 of their mobile introductions look like Lima derivatives, though they likely made a new mask, learning from their yield improvements in the more recent 65nm products (Phenom 9x50).

And the thread title is misleading. This does not replace or compete with Atom.
January 6, 2009 3:28:18 PM

This is exciting news! It sounds very promissing. This is one of the few cases where performance is NOT the goal, low power is.

And I know why AMD's stock has gone up 30%:
1) When you're at the bottom you have no where to go but up
2) AMD's stock price is so low that minor fluctuations will result in large percentage changes

Anyone who bought AMD at $2.00 has a very, VERY large grin on their face.
a c 100 à CPUs
January 6, 2009 3:36:30 PM

Malovane said:
I'm pretty sure it's based on the single core Athlon 64 line... with a die shrink to 65nm.


It looks like an underclocked and undervolted Sempron SI (65 nm single-core) with what appears to be a BGA interface that AMD calls "ASB1."
January 6, 2009 5:28:43 PM

i guess this one fails to resonate as exciting for me. another option in a crowded portable sector. looks like they are going after the power consumption angle because the price/performance argument makes no sense here.
!