AMD Refreshes C- and E-Series Fusion APUs

[Marcus Yam]

New Fusion for modest price points.

AMD Refreshes C- and E-Series Fusion APUs : Read more

 

[awolfe63]

Nice that you can reprint a press release without any journalistic review.

Number of hours of battery life is a meaningless statistic for a CPU (or APU). How big is the battery? What else is connected to it? A screen, perhaps?

 

[HotVomit]

That's terrific news.
What I really want to know is whether one of these (the E-450, especially)on a mini-ITX can smoothly handle a Ceton InfiniTV (4 CableCard HD streams)for HTPC and do a decent job accelerating Flash and Silverlight 5. Why? - 30 watts or so total usage and silence.

 

[cuecuemore]

[citation][nom]awolfe63[/nom]Nice that you can reprint a press release without any journalistic review.Number of hours of battery life is a meaningless statistic for a CPU (or APU). How big is the battery? What else is connected to it? A screen, perhaps?[/citation]
What?!? They make different kinds of batteries?? Now I'm confused...

 

[cloakster]

What are the model numbers of these new versions?

 

[sunflier]

AMD has shipped more than 12 million APUs, and sold more than five million of the popular C- and E-Series APUs in Q2 2011 alone.

How about shipping Bulldozer CPU's in 2011 too!!

 

[AppleBlowsDonkeyBalls]

[citation][nom]cloakster[/nom]What are the model numbers of these new versions?[/citation]

AMD Fusion C-60 and E-450. The main difference is that the C-60 supports Turbo CORE and can go up to 1.33GHz from the default 1GHz on the CPU and up to 400MHz from the default 277MHz on the GPU. As for the E-450, it differs from the E-350 by having a 50MHz higher CPU clock speed (1.65GHz), a 16MHz higher GPU clock speed (508MHz), and by supporting GPU Turbo that allows it to go up to 600MHz.

 

[nforce4max]

I wish that amd left the clocks on the gpu open for over and underclocking depending on what the user wanted to do. Why underclock well save battery and overclocking for when there is gaming At least the multipliers aren't locked.

 

[acadia11]

CAn this fit in a mobile device, i.e. phone? Or is it still way too much power required?

 

[stingstang]

@Acadia: Phones use about .5-1.5 watts.

 

[BulkZerker]

Nice little bump on the processors, I've been looking for a better lappy for a few months. The little bumps in clockspeed might just be what i need.

[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]CAn this fit in a mobile device, i.e. phone? Or is it still way too much power required?[/citation]

Why the hell do you need so much power on your phone? I'd love it if i could get a 3 day standby with normal use on my Moto Droid with the -STOCK- battery. But no, i'm lucky if it lasts 8 hours.

 

[AppleBlowsDonkeyBalls]

[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]CAn this fit in a mobile device, i.e. phone? Or is it still way too much power required?[/citation]

No. 9W TDP is too high for a smartphone or a tablet in heat output and power consumption. Tablets are a bit better in this regard as they have bigger chassis and can hold bigger batteries, so AMD made the Fusion Z-01 which has a 5.9W TDP for that niche. In terms of performance it's the same as the C-50 but it consumes less power.

 

[JamesSneed]

Using a Euro as a point of reference for chip size was so helpful. sarcasm

 

[jj463rd]

I was looking at a E-350 based ultraportable like the HP dm1-3210us.However I found that I could get a far beefier A4-3300M based HP g4-1117dx Notebook for a lesser price (at best buy) and it was a much better buy.In addition it had a DVD burner which for the ultraportable needed an external one (as an extra cost accessory).Although the notebook was bigger and heavier than the ultraportable it's still fairly small (having a 14 inch display).
The A4-3300M series was about 3 times as powerful as the E-350 according to passmark scores.Sure the battery life on the E-350 based ultraportable was better but not substantially so.I came to the conclusion that the it's too exorbitant to get the E series APU's for the benefit of having a ultraportable and one is better off economically going for a smaller A4 series notebook (it's much better at gaming too).

 

[eddieroolz]

A refresh already eh. Good stuff.

 

[alextheblue]

[citation][nom]AppleBlowsDonkeyBalls[/nom]No. 9W TDP is too high for a smartphone or a tablet in heat output and power consumption. Tablets are a bit better in this regard as they have bigger chassis and can hold bigger batteries, so AMD made the Fusion Z-01 which has a 5.9W TDP for that niche. In terms of performance it's the same as the C-50 but it consumes less power.[/citation]
I'd like another Z model release based on the C-60, now that would make for a stout tablet.

 

[Guest]

So did the clock rates stay the same which is slow? Graphics seem very good but the CPU part of the APU is weak.
I will give AMD credit for these APU's being better then Atom's. But that's not saying much. Its really a moot point anyway, Small netbooks or notebooks are kind of dead anyway.

 

[dalauder]

[citation][nom]jescott418[/nom]So did the clock rates stay the same which is slow? Graphics seem very good but the CPU part of the APU is weak. I will give AMD credit for these APU's being better then Atom's. But that's not saying much. Its really a moot point anyway, Small netbooks or notebooks are kind of dead anyway.[/citation]For netbooks to have a niche, they really need to do something well that a phone doesn't. Right now they're just crappy small laptops--pretty much the same as a smartphone (w/ wifi). If they beefed them up a bit so they could actually replace a desktop (you know, like a $350 i3-370M laptop does) for non-gamers, they'd be useful.

There's a market for cheap laptops and a market for internet devices (phones). Something anaemic in between is pretty pointless.

 

[Silmarunya]

[citation][nom]jescott418[/nom]So did the clock rates stay the same which is slow? Graphics seem very good but the CPU part of the APU is weak. I will give AMD credit for these APU's being better then Atom's. But that's not saying much. Its really a moot point anyway, Small netbooks or notebooks are kind of dead anyway.[/citation]

Clock speed says very little about performance. Even on the CPU side, AMD's offerings outperform Atom by a wide margin (thanks to thinkgs like out of order execution).

Netbooks dead? They hype's over, but dead is too strong a word. There will always be a market for netbooks, as all of their competitors have a fundamental flaw:

- Tablets? Fun, not functional.
- ULV laptops? Almost as small and far more powerful, but more expensive.
- Ultrabooks/Macbook Air/high end ULV-thingies? Even more powerful, but also even more expensive.

 

[ProDigit10]

that shows you the demand on battery saving chipsets out there above performance oriented models!

 

[annymmo]

The E-series now has up to 10.5 hours of resting battery life, and the C-Series pushes it to 12 hours.

What TDP and power requirements have these chips?
It's important for knowing the thermal budget, not electrical one.