Transmeta 90nm Efficeon

AMD_Guy

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2003
6
0
18,510
http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040910_122544.html

I just saw this article and am confused. It says that the Opteron was the first CPU to include NX support for viruses but that the 90nm Efficeon is the first to do it with a low power part.

The article doesn't define low power. There is a 30 watt version of the Opteron and I thought that was pretty low power. It's been out for while yet Transmeta is claiming to be the first.

My question is what does Wolfgang/Transmeta consider low power to be?
 

RichPLS

Champion
The Crusoe CPUs will use far less power than their peers. Transmeta says its chips will consume only 1 to 2 watts, compared with 8 to 16 watts for other mobile x86 processors in the same performance range. The simpler microprocessor core helps, as does an integrated DRAM controller and PCI bus interface. Perhaps most notably, the chip uses an advanced form of power management that Transmeta calls LongRun.

From
http://www.pcworld.com/resource/article/0,aid,15396,00.asp



========================
Try everything...
Do not be afraid of failure, for this is how we learn and grow...
Live life to the fullest...
Do not regret what you have not yet done!!!
 

AMD_Guy

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2003
6
0
18,510
OK, so my question is still there, what does he consider low power? The mobile A64 has been out quite a while and unless I'm mistaken was released before the Efficion.

You do raise an interesting point, "says its chips will consume only 1 to 2 watts, compared with 8 to 16 watts for other mobile x86 processors in the same performance range." As far as I can tell there aren't really any other CPUs in the same performance range. Everything else completely creams it. The only thing it really has an edge over is the Geode GX2 366. Just because it has an impressive sounding 1GHz clock speed doesn't really mean too much when you consider it throttles back the clock speed as soon as you start to do anything with it.

Now, I don't really want ot get into a flame of the Transmeta product line. I'm really just looking for some kind of verification of Transmeta's claim that they had the first low power implementation of NX technology in an x86 compatible CPU. THG reported it's claim and I would like to know if THG agrees.
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
It probably depends on your definition of low power. Hey, you could compare the Transmeta 1GHz to the C3 1GHz and you'll probably find it performing better AND using less power.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
 

AMD_Guy

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2003
6
0
18,510
It does out-perform the C3 1GHz about half the time (from what I've seen). But the point is, as you say, how do you define low power?

I'm trying to take this to the next level from a THG point of view. I think it is uncommon for THG to allow themselves to be a propoganda outlet when the data is false. I don't believe that Transmeta was the first provide NX support in a low power CPU because no one defines low power as 2 watts or less. This is the only way that this claim could be true.
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
no one defines low power as 2 watts or less
Ehhh...didn't you JUST say that it varies person to person?? I know I sure as hell define low-power as sub 5W. Does anything else that makes 5W out perform this (I actually don't know...I'm not attacking you anymore)? I know there are Geodes in that range, but I have yet to see any performance of the Efficeon or the Geodes.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

AMD_Guy

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2003
6
0
18,510
No, I didn't say it varies from person to person, I had no idea you were ever attacking me, wtf are you talking about?
 

endyen

Splendid
I think they were comparing to the 16 watt PMs, not the 30 watt A64s. Transmeta can say anything they like, and it would be relatively true. They are in a class by themselves. True, no one else wants to be in that class, but, well...
 

Vapor

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
2,206
0
19,780
But the point is, as you say, how do you define low power?
"You" fully implies person to person, IMO. Unless you were requesting ONLY Crash's opinion...

Also, how can you say no one defines low power as 2 watts or less? WTF did you even have a cow about TGH's report on the Efficeon?? He was using a personal definition (unless there are guidelines that I am unaware of) of a term that has no structure. And in addition, what processors are in that power category and outperform it? I haven't seen any Efficeon or Geode benchies, tell me where they are. The person who wrote that little piece of information was simply writing it based off a marketing sheet from Transmeta, and now you complain about it?? I know this is hypocritical (but only to prove a point), but wtf do you even CARE???

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
 

TRENDING THREADS