This is really exciting. With such a low TDP I'd imagine that lots of devices are going to get a lot more powerful now, instead of the traditional escalation of desktop CPU power while everything moves at a snail's pace.
[citation][nom]otacon72[/nom]AMD is so far behind now they will never catch up. Llano won't be out until Q3 from everything I've read and the only release date for Bulldozer is 2011. Several articles claim Bulldozer is already a generation behind SandyBridge. AMD was left in the dust when Core 2 came out. Thumb me down all you want...lol[/citation]
You may be true to an extent...but this sounds more like an intel fan boy who is biased and exaggerates the truth.
Score one for AMD. The smartest move for them now is to whore the living hell out of that, and sell it to every company with the hint of a pulse. Do that, and BEFORE Intel starts their own line of processors, and they may have a chance.
It's not meant to "beat" Sandy Bridge - this is targeted at an entirely different market. AMD currently can't compete in the $150+ CPU price range, so why shouldn't they press their advantage in low-cost, low-power parts?
This embedded board could be useful for HTPC/streamers, firewalls, and NAS devices.
Thank you Josh G. He's right, as I looked for a HTPC, all systems I looked at were Atom+ION/2 combos. VIA had a good combo but lacked in conservative values. Even for a carPC the Atom+ION was the best choice, but all this here looks good on paper. Looking forward to see it put to the test.
I don't about that link to xbitlabs but I somehow doubt looking at the architecture for the Bulldozer that it will be faster than Sandy Bridge. It may be as fast or close to as fast, but I highly doubt it will be faster.
As simple and josh pointed out this is not meant to compete with Sandy bridge. Based on the benchmarks that I have seen this should double the graphics performance of atom/ion combos while gaining battery life and getting away from optimus graphics switching.
This would be outstanding for HTPC's, and may even give netbooks some gaming potential, especially given their lower resolutions.
As much as I'd like to root for AMD, I don't think they will retake the performance lead anytime soon. Intel would have to make mistakes, and so far they haven't. (Though the lower end Sandybridge should have come with the better GPU since the higher end ones would likely be used in systems with discrete graphic cards)
[citation][nom]mayankleoboy1[/nom]in embedded systems you really dont need parallel processing. almost all of the work is done in a serial processing. i dunno whats the market segment they want to capture.regarding bulldozer, it will have a tough time competing with intel. its late to the scene and wont be able to compete with the intel die shrink.but i love competition.[/citation]
In most of systems embedded or not parallel processing is big plus. You don't need quad or octa core, but dual should be minimum with exception of single task devices but those wont need apu anyway, will get better with arm.