Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Intel: We're Not Ditching The Atom Brand

By - Source: DigiTimes | B 61 comments

Intel has officially nuked rumors about plans to re-brand its Atom chips.

Recent reports indicate that Intel plans to re-brand its Cedar Trail processors slated for 2012 because demand for Atom-based netbooks, nettops, handheld devices, consumer electronics products and embedded devices have dropped significantly. The reason behind the decline, according to industry sources, is due to the "poor brand image" of Atom CPUs.

According to Intel's roadmap, Cedar Trail CPUs will be launched in November 2011, and will include the Atom N2800 and N2700 for netbooks, and the Atom D2700 and D2500 for nettops. Industry sources claim that the re-branding will cover Intel's N/D/Z/E lineups.

But Friday a spokesperson from Intel squashed the reports. "There are no plans to change the Atom brand. We are on track to launch new Atom processors during the fourth quarter, with more new Atom processors during the first half of 2012."

In addition to the Cedar Trail CPUs, Intel also plans to launch its Medfield CPUs for Android tablets and smartphones in the first half of 2012.

Display 61 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 23 Hide
    tpi2007 , September 24, 2011 2:45 AM
    Sales have dropped because:

    1.

    a) The hype has somewhat passed. Most people that bought a Netbook in 2008 have little reason to buy another one as Intel hasn't given them any reason to do so. Current Atom are still being built with 45nm technology, while Intel has been selling CPUs built on 32nm technology since the beginning of 2010. Intel has just been milking the 45nm node. And now all of a sudden are going to release 32nm Atoms later this year, and within a year, 22nm Atoms. So, 3 years at 45nm, and now just a year at 32nm. Wonder why it isn't selling more 45nm Atoms ?

    b) The Dual Core Atoms N550 and N570 are actually good performers, capable of decoding 720p in software, both offline and online (720p flash videos), but they get hot for such small platforms, with an 8.5w TDP. And then the GPU hasn't changed and you can't even play with acceptable framerates or even correctly render Half-Life 2, which came out in 2004, and the platform is still using 1.5v DDR3 that can also get hot because it is not actively cooled. The 32nm Atoms must use 1.35 or better yet, 1.25 low voltage DDR3 so-dimms, to improve battery life and perhaps more importantly, reduce heat output.

    2. AMD has come to market with better offers. Their C-30 is good competition for the N455; their C-50 is good competition for the N550, and their C-60 is even better than the N570. And I'm only talking about CPU performance. AMD wins in GPU performance all days of the week, plus it already supports 4GB of RAM, and the platform also supports HDMI out, something Intel has yet to provide. We'll have to wait for their 32nm Atoms for that. Meanwhile AMD has already sold 12 million APU's, including the Netbook oriented C-30, C-50 and C-60.

  • 21 Hide
    apache_lives , September 24, 2011 1:27 AM
    The market is clogged with them and people are realising these tiny units are useless for anything more then basic tasks - simple.

    People always go for the cheapest nastiest options, see it all the time at my shop, we tell the customer "netbook - its basically for internet hence the name, maybe viewing photos or videos, music etc but not much more" and they still get them and still come back "oh it doesnt run my xxxxxx" "wheres the dvd" (FFS morons lol) - this is the reason.
  • 15 Hide
    DjEaZy , September 24, 2011 3:51 AM
    Intel: We're Not Ditching The Atom Brand??? WHY!?! It's wasted silicon!!!
Other Comments
  • 1 Hide
    Anonymous , September 24, 2011 1:15 AM
    How can the article be related to itself?
  • 21 Hide
    apache_lives , September 24, 2011 1:27 AM
    The market is clogged with them and people are realising these tiny units are useless for anything more then basic tasks - simple.

    People always go for the cheapest nastiest options, see it all the time at my shop, we tell the customer "netbook - its basically for internet hence the name, maybe viewing photos or videos, music etc but not much more" and they still get them and still come back "oh it doesnt run my xxxxxx" "wheres the dvd" (FFS morons lol) - this is the reason.
  • 0 Hide
    nordlead , September 24, 2011 1:36 AM
    I actually really like the Atom processors. My File/Backup server is running on an Atom D525 and draws 31W at idle. I'm positive that since I'm drawing so little power (~10% load) on an ancient PSU that if I got myself a PicoPSU I would probably be drawing 20-25W
  • 2 Hide
    CKKwan , September 24, 2011 2:35 AM
    Atom is something Intel did correctly, I love Atom. Hopes it will stay!
  • 23 Hide
    tpi2007 , September 24, 2011 2:45 AM
    Sales have dropped because:

    1.

    a) The hype has somewhat passed. Most people that bought a Netbook in 2008 have little reason to buy another one as Intel hasn't given them any reason to do so. Current Atom are still being built with 45nm technology, while Intel has been selling CPUs built on 32nm technology since the beginning of 2010. Intel has just been milking the 45nm node. And now all of a sudden are going to release 32nm Atoms later this year, and within a year, 22nm Atoms. So, 3 years at 45nm, and now just a year at 32nm. Wonder why it isn't selling more 45nm Atoms ?

    b) The Dual Core Atoms N550 and N570 are actually good performers, capable of decoding 720p in software, both offline and online (720p flash videos), but they get hot for such small platforms, with an 8.5w TDP. And then the GPU hasn't changed and you can't even play with acceptable framerates or even correctly render Half-Life 2, which came out in 2004, and the platform is still using 1.5v DDR3 that can also get hot because it is not actively cooled. The 32nm Atoms must use 1.35 or better yet, 1.25 low voltage DDR3 so-dimms, to improve battery life and perhaps more importantly, reduce heat output.

    2. AMD has come to market with better offers. Their C-30 is good competition for the N455; their C-50 is good competition for the N550, and their C-60 is even better than the N570. And I'm only talking about CPU performance. AMD wins in GPU performance all days of the week, plus it already supports 4GB of RAM, and the platform also supports HDMI out, something Intel has yet to provide. We'll have to wait for their 32nm Atoms for that. Meanwhile AMD has already sold 12 million APU's, including the Netbook oriented C-30, C-50 and C-60.

  • 0 Hide
    clonazepam , September 24, 2011 2:48 AM
    Quote:
    What's in a name? that which we call a rose
    By any other name would smell as sweet


    Sorry, I couldn't resist.
  • 15 Hide
    DjEaZy , September 24, 2011 3:51 AM
    Intel: We're Not Ditching The Atom Brand??? WHY!?! It's wasted silicon!!!
  • 2 Hide
    alidan , September 24, 2011 4:25 AM
    WitchunterHow can the article be related to itself?

    ... its a hermaphrodite?
  • 1 Hide
    eddieroolz , September 24, 2011 4:50 AM
    The term netbook doesn't have a good image, period.
  • 3 Hide
    jryan388 , September 24, 2011 5:07 AM
    They aren't, but we already have.
  • 3 Hide
    amk-aka-Phantom , September 24, 2011 5:09 AM
    Intel, Y U NO?

    I had to work with a lot of Atoms because many fools fall for the low power consumption nonsense and then I have to manage whole networks of these POS machines... they're absolutely USELESS. I advise all our clients against Atom.

    2 days ago we also got an AMD Zacate box. Very good Mini-ITX Gigabyte board - has everything, USB 3.0, SATA 6 Gbps, HDMI... but the CPU is useless, I'd take a Core 2 Duo over it ANY DAY.

    In future, I plan to use i3-2100s in all low budget builds, these CPUs are great value for money, unlike the stupid Atom. So what if I can get the whole mobo with an Atom on it for the price of an i3-2100? The mobo will be $h!t and the PC will be slow as hell. Trust me, I've seen ENOUGH of this low-power junk. AMD or Intel, it doesn't have a place on desktops... Low-energy laptops - maybe, but I'd rather see Fusion than Atom there (and TBH, a Core i3 would still be better - WTF is the use for a low-power laptop if it's bloody slow?)

    Atom's low power architecture sucks big-time. It's been proven that a 1.6 GHz Atom is about as fast as a 900 MHz Celeron M, and I'm convinced it is right by trying out both the old Celeron M EeePC 900 MHz (my netbook) and a newer Atom EeePC (1.6 or 1.8 GHz, not sure exactly).

    Even for basic tasks, these CPUs are not enough. The systems freeze while writing an e-mail or copying files... they just suck. Atoms as they are must go.
  • 2 Hide
    enewmen , September 24, 2011 5:11 AM
    nordleadI actually really like the Atom processors. My File/Backup server is running on an Atom D525 and draws 31W at idle. I'm positive that since I'm drawing so little power (~10% load) on an ancient PSU that if I got myself a PicoPSU I would probably be drawing 20-25W

    If you really like Atoms, then you will love dual-core C-series APUs.
    My 8w 10" C-50 netbook with 4 gigs RAM can ALSO easily handle Photoshop, Starcraft 2, full 1080p video, etc..
    You can also find mini-itx size APU PCs that work as great little file severs and can actually play the HD video over HDMI to the TV.
  • 5 Hide
    rottingsheep , September 24, 2011 5:24 AM
    atom is meant for simple tasks, not for heavy multitasking and definitely not for gaming. your not going to encode your entire bluray collection on a netbook, are you? atom consumes very little electricity so stop comparing it to 35w or even 25w TDP cpus. with the late release of amd's apus, it's not surprising that real improvements(and competitive pricing)in the low power cpu segment is just happening now.
  • 8 Hide
    amk-aka-Phantom , September 24, 2011 5:31 AM
    Quote:
    atom is meant for simple tasks, not for heavy multitasking and definitely not for gaming. your not going to encode your entire bluray collection on a netbook, are you? atom consumes very little electricity so stop comparing it to 35w or even 25w TDP cpus. with the late release of amd's apus, it's not surprising that real improvements(and competitive pricing)in the low power cpu segment is just happening now.


    Atom sucks in EVERY task, period. Browsers freeze. OS loading times are a pain. NOBODY needs an Atom unless it's just a file server.
  • 5 Hide
    rottingsheep , September 24, 2011 5:40 AM
    amk-aka-phantomAtom sucks in EVERY task, period. Browsers freeze. OS loading times are a pain. NOBODY needs an Atom unless it's just a file server.

    It only means you don't need an atom. STOP claiming you think for everyone.
  • 14 Hide
    ojas , September 24, 2011 5:48 AM
    lostmyclani have acer one... and that is slowwwwwwwwwwww... i cant play warcraft 3.:S a little piece of shit. i wand APU NOW!


    It's not supposed to play warcraft...it's a netbook processor.
  • 3 Hide
    enewmen , September 24, 2011 5:52 AM
    ojasIt's not supposed to play warcraft...it's a netbook processor.

    My NETbook IS an Acer One and it CAN play Warcraft & StarCraft 2.
    AO522 to be exact. It's also NOT an Atom, of course...
    I expect the Cedar Trail to only have modest gains as well..
    The Atoms where never ment to have high performance per watt or have high scalability. So the Atom needs a lot more love than it has been getting.
  • 3 Hide
    rottingsheep , September 24, 2011 5:57 AM
    people buying these processors are not expecting an i7 performance out of it, those who do, are stupid.
  • 3 Hide
    amk-aka-Phantom , September 24, 2011 6:03 AM
    Quote:
    It only means you don't need an atom. STOP claiming you think for everyone.


    No I WILL claim for everyone. 90% of "common users" I've seen are very unhappy with their Atoms. As I said, it's slow in ALL tasks. You know, even the average user likes his programs fast and without freezes. Read my posts before you dismiss them, for hell's sake.
  • 2 Hide
    cookoy , September 24, 2011 7:06 AM
    atom was developed as a low-power cpu with slow performance. but over its 3 years existence, development on improving it was even slower, as if intel doesn't give a shit about it. so why bother it using one.
Display more comments