AMD Neo - Kinda sorta fighting Atom

[Trace]

Released in Jan, I present to you the AMD Neo.

Quite interesting, I must say.

Enjoy

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/01/yukon-badge.jpg


http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/06/amd-kinda-sorta-takes-aim-at-atom-with-athlon-neo/


and HP is releasing a DV2 with the Yukon platfom: http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2009/01/amds-neo-processor-debuts-in-hp-notebook-whoah.ars

[Zephik]

35W vs 2.5W - Two totally different class of processors. Even the new Atom 2.0GHz uses less than 2.4W and gives you the performance equivalent of probably what? Maybe a 2.2GHz-2.4GHz Pentium 4? These AMD chips would have to give me at least the equivalent of a Pentium 4 3.0GHz-3.2GHz to get me interested. Because otherwise, I'd just rather have the 2.0GHz Atom, since the processing power increase with the AMD wouldn't be that much better and would come at a pretty high cost with the higher TDP (and thus lower battery life).

But they seem to be about "twice as good" as the current Atom's, and the current Atom's are about the equivalent of a 2.0GHz Pentium 4... so... they're probably what? P4 3.0GHz equivalent? Which if correct, sounds like what I was hoping for. Then you also get the much better graphics processing power which I think is included with that TDP rating of 35W? Hell, if that last part is true, then even when compared to the new Atom 2.0GHz, that still sounds pretty good. It just depends on what kind of battery life we're going to see. Give me at least three and half hours with that AMD/ATI combo and I'm sold. Throw it in a netbook and call it done. Its no 7-9 hour netbook, but it would be more powerful than an atom and graphics processing wise MUCH more powerful than whats currently being offered with the Atom netbooks.

/thinking aloud

[Trace]

Those were my sentiments exactly
And if I did read it correctly, the graphics processor is included in that rating
At which point HD playback and minimal gameing becomes possible.
That DV2 should be a 12" screen but I'm not sure on battery life

[Zephik]

Also forgot to add that it can't be too expensive. I'd rather spend $400 on an Atom based unit with great battery life than $700+ on the same unit but with more processing power than what most people need and a good boost in graphics processing power, but at a cost of battery life. Because in the end, I would love more power in a netbook, but I don't want a netbook for power, I want one for portability and to get average tasks done (which they already do). As they are right now, they're plenty powerful unless you're into more advanced computing, which in THAT case you probably wouldn't be looking into netbooks anyways. So a good price is a must in my opinion. I'd say $500 would be pretty tempting.

Then again, I'm the kind of person who understands what I need and can calculate performance to price ratios pretty well. There are quite a few people out there who would probably go "oooh, more power! Even though I don't need it! Sold!". lol thats why I hate shopping with people. They always buy things they don't actually need, but they buy them anyways because they "just want the best of the best" or whatever. The money people could save if they would just buy smartly! *slaps forehead* drives me nuts. lol

[Trace]

I know exactly what you mean--my brother did the same thing when I helped him build his PC. But with the price, performance, and portability, I'd say they have quite a good product in this. I want to see the 45nm version and what sort of TDP that has.

[FuzzyPlushroom]

I'd like to see something based on this platform with, say, a 13-14" screen. Compact laptop with good battery life and a better video card than many 17" models? Sign me up.

[TheGreatSatan]

I wonder how much the "hafnium-infused 45nm high-k silicon technology " helps the Atom?

I don't know what the hell the Neo has

[Trace]

it's 65nm