Intel's 22nm Silvermont Atoms: Four Cores, Up to 1.4 GHz

[Guest]

Intel is serious about its smartphone and tablet processor.

Intel's 22nm Silvermont Atoms: Four Cores, Up to 1.4 GHz : Read more

 

[classzero]

Meh it's an atom. They need to ditch the name so people don't dismiss it.

 

[jaquith]

Leave it to China to leak more crap. More cores are welcome as long as it's efficient and won't suck my battery dry in a couple of hours.

 

[danwat1234]

I'd rather take a higher clocked dual core or hyperthreaded single core. Single core performance is stupid slow with Atom. I hope Intel stops making Atom Netbook chipsets, so many people I know that have them and they (the computers) are dogs.
The Asus U24E-xs71 laptop is around 3.5 pounds and has a full blown Sandy Bridge 2.8/3.5GHZ CPU. Sure it's $800 right now but wait 2 years and then why not buy that compared to the latest atom netbook.

 

[jaquith]

Reading might help, this Atom Silvermont CPU is for your Phones & Tablets -- not your Laptop or PC... The Atom CPU is for ultra-low-voltage use and >small size<.

 

[serendipiti]

Mobile phones have to do with battery life more than raw processing power... and there was a long trip to get to where ARM was and is...

 

[kryten42]

[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]Reading might help, this Atom Silvermont CPU is for your Phones & Tablets -- not your Laptop or PC... The Atom CPU is for ultra-low-voltage use and >small size<.[/citation]

Yes, reading would help. Third paragraph:
"likely to be offered in variety of applications and not just tablets and smartphones"

 

[salgado18]

it is clear that this is the Atom variant we have been waiting for since 2008

I wasn't waiting.

 

[TheBigTroll]

tell me when it puts out the performance of a i5 2500k

 

[math1337]

It looks like ARM is going to be getting some competition soon. Always good, even when the competitor is Intel. I can't wait for faster procs.

 

[g00fysmiley]

i wouldn't mind a tablet that can run x86 and x64 instruction sets ... 22nm should be able to run efficiently it will nto have the power of even a SB desktop processor.. but why would you need that on a tablet? i just want somehting to load pdf pages as fast as i can swipe to them and good video playback

 

[azraa]

For me, i3 and FX 4100 are entry level. Anywhere below that is just stealing.
Stupid people/extreme novices just go for the absolute cheapest (atom, or e-series apu), trying to get their fancy new pc run smooth. Obviously they are frustrated about the performance and lose interest in the pc technology, making more people uneducated and go choose apple or other stupid stuff like an i7 for office use.

 

[christop]

It would be nice in a tablet..

 

[TheBigTroll]

For me, i3 and FX 4100 are entry level. Anywhere below that is just stealing.
Stupid people/extreme novices just go for the absolute cheapest (atom, or e-series apu), trying to get their fancy new pc run smooth. Obviously they are frustrated about the performance and lose interest in the pc technology, making more people uneducated and go choose apple or other stupid stuff like an i7 for office use.

sounds like most people from my class (high school).

 

[foolishone]

The image says 2.4Ghz not 1.4Ghz ...

 

[Guest]

Out of order instruction set. Nice! It should be really powerful now.

 

[altriss]

[citation][nom]azraa[/nom]For me, i3 and FX 4100 are entry level. Anywhere below that is just stealing. Stupid people/extreme novices just go for the absolute cheapest (atom, or e-series apu), trying to get their fancy new pc run smooth. Obviously they are frustrated about the performance and lose interest in the pc technology, making more people uneducated and go choose apple or other stupid stuff like an i7 for office use.[/citation]

What don't you get by: "smart phone, tablet and cars applications"?
This chip is NOT for computer use, it would be like using a Tegra in a Desktop and complain about the lack of performance compared to a core-i 3,5 or 7.
It just shows you didn't get the point of that chip at all. With that kind of mind you can also complain about how core-i7 are weak compared to the Xeon-phi or says that GTX690 sucks when compared to the S20 models of NVIDIA.
So please when comparing power/consumption/efficiency, try to think about application, not absolute spec...

 

[bgrt]

Heard that Silvermont will have an out of order execution core. Welcome to the 2000s Intel.

 

[azraa]

Wooahh I dont know why so much downrating on my comment, but you seem to be just hating.

I do know the point of such a tiny chip. I was making an ANALOGY. Of course Atom is best suited for mobile/low wattage devices. But I had to remind everyone that not so long ago, netbooks (now obsolete) were geared with Atom chips. I never mentioned Desktops using Atom. Below i3 and FX I can mention Core2Duo, Athlons and so on. Some markets (other less developed countries) still include this kind of CPUs in entry level notebooks/netbooks, and I was referring to that.

And about the i7 reference, you just made clear that you dont know how to read properly, making up whatever your mind wants to read.

Anyway, good on this development by Intel. I just wanted to made clear how bad the Atom was back in the day. Now i can add that taking this path for it is a better choice from its manufacturer.

 

[mortsmi7]

[citation][nom]azraa[/nom]I never mentioned Desktops using Atom.[/citation][citation][nom]azraa[/nom]Stupid people/extreme novices just go for the absolute cheapest (atom, or e-series apu), trying to get their fancy new pc run smooth.[/citation]

PC sounds like desktop to me.

 

[rantoc]

Intel's 22nm Silvermont Atoms: Four Cores, Up to 1.4 GHz

The leaked fact sheet says 1.2 - 2.4 GHz, please is it so hard to proof read the articles at least once before publishing it? - Is it so hard to make quality articles based on the facts in front of the eyes? Some of the writers (note the word some) work hard to make "Toms Hardware - The authority of lazy journalism." the new slogan!

 

[Pherule]

[citation][nom]azraa[/nom]For me, i3 and FX 4100 are entry level. Anywhere below that is just stealing. Stupid people/extreme novices just go for the absolute cheapest (atom, or e-series apu), trying to get their fancy new pc run smooth.[/citation]
You are forgetting that Sandy and Ivy Bridge dual core Pentiums are actually worth something. The performance increased gained by going from SB/IB Pentium to i3 is negligible, as the only real thing you get is hyper-threading, which is generally useless. With the SB/IB Pentiums you are basically getting a dual-core i5 with slightly lower clocks. It is still a really powerful CPU, and certainly better than the old Core2Duo's.

 

[ojas]

[citation][nom]kryten42[/nom]Yes, reading would help. Third paragraph:"likely to be offered in variety of applications and not just tablets and smartphones"[/citation]
Which still doesn't imply Notebooks. Netbooks, maybe, but i seriously doubt a PC forma factor computer will be getting an SoC too soon. Maybe by the time Broadwell or Skylake appear on the scene, yes.

For now, phones, tablets, cars, etc.

[citation][nom]azraa[/nom]Wooahh I dont know why so much downrating on my comment, but you seem to be just hating.I do know the point of such a tiny chip. I was making an ANALOGY. Of course Atom is best suited for mobile/low wattage devices. But I had to remind everyone that not so long ago, netbooks (now obsolete) were geared with Atom chips. I never mentioned Desktops using Atom. Below i3 and FX I can mention Core2Duo, Athlons and so on. Some markets (other less developed countries) still include this kind of CPUs in entry level notebooks/netbooks, and I was referring to that.And about the i7 reference, you just made clear that you dont know how to read properly, making up whatever your mind wants to read.Anyway, good on this development by Intel. I just wanted to made clear how bad the Atom was back in the day. Now i can add that taking this path for it is a better choice from its manufacturer.[/citation]
Again, this is a freaking SoC. Not a standalone CPU. relax. And everyone here knows how bad the Atom was back in the day. Point is that it's not so bad anymore, get over it.

Knowing what the current single core + HT Atom SoC can do, i know this one will be really good. Question remains, will it still look so good after a year.

 

[g00fysmiley]

[citation][nom]azraa[/nom]For me, i3 and FX 4100 are entry level. Anywhere below that is just stealing. Stupid people/extreme novices just go for the absolute cheapest (atom, or e-series apu), trying to get their fancy new pc run smooth. Obviously they are frustrated about the performance and lose interest in the pc technology, making more people uneducated and go choose apple or other stupid stuff like an i7 for office use.[/citation]

i disagree, most people have no use for a cpu that powerful, a nice low wattage or cheap cpu will do jsut fine for most users needs. for my htpc i run a old athlon II 250... a 25 watt cpu paired with a gts 430, 4 gigs ram , a 60 gig agility ssd and 1 tb hdd... it cost only a few hundred bucks and somehting liek this would fit most non gamers needs. it plays blueray and has no trouble streaming 1080p vidoeo. i don't really have any (real) games loaded on it, but people use my little htpc to update thier facebook and my brother in law like using it to steam and play little flash games for which is does an excellent job.

honestly imo it is the ssd that is getting more important than cpu speed for most users, my wife's pc is an old amd machine and even putting in an ssd for everythign but gaming it is almost as fast as my less old phenom !! 955 black until you start loading games

 

[ashinms]

Not good. At least with ARM, several different companies with licenses instead of one company that will only keep prices low long enough to get a stranglehold on the market and then start jacking prices up.