Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th May 2006 21:23 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems Despite the advent of lower-power designs from Intel and AMD recently, today's processors are still power-hungry beasties. One company says it has a solution to the problem, which may lead to the kind of clock speed increases we used to see back in the heyday of Intel's 'it's all about CPU speed' fixation.
Order by: Score:
theory and practice
by halfmanhalfamazing on Tue 9th May 2006 22:25 UTC
halfmanhalfamazing
Member since:
2005-07-23

Early stages of development eh? I've got my doubts based on some other theoretical-on-paper products that didn't turn out so well in reality including but not limited to netburst, glaze 3d, rambus, and the K6III.

Ok, maybe the Glaze 3D doesn't count, that's vaporware.

The idea of square CPU cycles is an innovative approach though.

Reply Score: 3

RE: theory and practice
by Babi Asu on Tue 9th May 2006 23:31 UTC in reply to "theory and practice"
Babi Asu Member since:
2006-02-11

But Rambus is succesfull recently ... by sueing DDR RAM manufacturers over IP infringement.

Reply Score: 1

doubts
by KenJackson on Tue 9th May 2006 23:47 UTC in reply to "theory and practice"
KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

Multigig says the pulses remain synchronized...
Multigig's solution is still in the early phases of testing.


This idea is such that it needs a pun to summarize it. You have doubts. I have doubts too.

Reply Score: 1

Interesting, but..
by Ronald Vos on Tue 9th May 2006 22:58 UTC
Ronald Vos
Member since:
2005-07-06

..but remember that 75% of 50 Watt is still 13x as much as ARM chips, or a number of MIPS and PPC chips consume ;)

But still: getting more juice from x86 using less juice can be a good thing. For one: saves on the CO2.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Interesting, but..
by MightyPenguin on Thu 11th May 2006 18:39 UTC in reply to "Interesting, but.."
MightyPenguin Member since:
2005-11-18

Yes it's more then ARM, but is that really Apples to Apples performance wise? Especially when you're talking about the more complex instructions x86 can do compared to some ARM chips? Anyone have any benchmarks comparing performance/power ratio of X86 and ARM?

Reply Score: 1

mini-itx
by ozonehole on Wed 10th May 2006 01:35 UTC
ozonehole
Member since:
2006-01-07

If you're looking for a low-power system today (not some years in the future), check out www.mini-itx.com (and no, I don't work for them or own VIA stock).

I've noticed that DamnSmallLinux sells mini-itx systems on their web site. Plenty of other sources, if you look around.

Edited 2006-05-10 01:35

Reply Score: 2

re: mini-itx
by CPUGuy on Wed 10th May 2006 14:30 UTC
CPUGuy
Member since:
2005-07-06

VIA has onoe of their processors running at like 1.5w

Reply Score: 1

RE: re: mini-itx
by 1c3d0g on Thu 11th May 2006 12:05 UTC in reply to "re: mini-itx"
1c3d0g Member since:
2005-07-06

Right. And you conveniently forgot to mention its piss-poor performance... ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: re: mini-itx
by CPUGuy on Fri 12th May 2006 02:22 UTC in reply to "RE: re: mini-itx"
CPUGuy Member since:
2005-07-06

No worse than any of there other ones, which aren't THAT bad.
I mean, they don't compare to Intel or AMD but are great if you need a useable performance w/ modern software and low-power reqs.

Reply Score: 1

v Nice article theft
by stlarson on Wed 10th May 2006 17:25 UTC
RE: Nice article theft
by dylansmrjones on Wed 10th May 2006 18:00 UTC in reply to "Nice article theft"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Not this old debate again. They are attributing it to ArsTechnica. This is done by the link, and by the "Linked by Thom Holwerda".

It clearly states it's a link and it shows the first part of the article. Nothing wrong in that. You are just not reading.

Reply Score: 2

Why not VIA?
by -pekr- on Thu 11th May 2006 09:17 UTC
-pekr-
Member since:
2006-03-28

I wonder why we are told about products to come, instead about products, which are here :-)

You can go to http://www.epiacenter.com , which seems to be more active than http://www.mini-itx.com and you will find there link to reviews to C7-M based notebooks already ....

cheers,
Petr

Reply Score: 1

VIA...
by patrick_ on Fri 12th May 2006 14:05 UTC
patrick_
Member since:
2006-03-02

Anyone seen the new VIA ULV's (ultra-low-voltage)? The 1.5GHz ULV consumes 7.5W. That's great. Go VIA. I just bought a 533MHz fanless VIA C3, which uses about 2.6W, for my server.

http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/processors/eden_ulv/

Reply Score: 1