DaemonForums  

Go Back   DaemonForums > DaemonForums.org > News

News News regarding BSD and related.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   (View Single Post)  
Old 4th January 2011
vermaden's Avatar
vermaden vermaden is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: pl_PL.lodz
Posts: 1,051
Thanked 118 Times in 93 Posts
Default VIA Announces the VIA Nano X2 Dual Core CPU

Quote:
VIA Nano X2 processors are the first truly optimized, low power dual-core processors. Combining two 64-bit ‘Isaiah’ cores in one die, VIA Nano X2 processors deliver industry leading performance-per-watt and improved multi-tasking ability, without consuming more power.
http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/processors/nanoX2/
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind
"If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds

Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”.
vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd
Reply With Quote
  #2   (View Single Post)  
Old 4th January 2011
Carpetsmoker's Avatar
Carpetsmoker Carpetsmoker is offline
Real Name: Martin
Old man from scene 24
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 2,052
Thanked 198 Times in 156 Posts
Default

Something like a Nano L2200 has a 17W TDP, the lowest they offer is the U2300 which is rated at 5W TDP.

These are *single* cores.

My Atom 330 (dual core) has a TDP of 8W ... The newer D525 sits at 13W but that includes integrated graphics.

The Via Nano does seem to be faster, but if you look at Performance/Watt ratio, then intel seems to be doing better ...

I'm not an Intel fan, and I would welcome any competition on the market, but as far as I can see the Intel Atom is doing better on most respects ...

The Nano may have an advantage in pricing and license conditions though.
__________________
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
Reply With Quote
  #3   (View Single Post)  
Old 4th January 2011
vermaden's Avatar
vermaden vermaden is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: pl_PL.lodz
Posts: 1,051
Thanked 118 Times in 93 Posts
Default

Quote:
Something like a Nano L2200 has a 17W TDP, the lowest they offer is the U2300 which is rated at 5W TDP.

These are *single* cores.
They still use older 65nm process, with 45nm thwy would probably fit in 12W/3.5W.

Quote:
My Atom 330 (dual core) has a TDP of 8W ...
But it now depends WHICH North Bridge You will use, with 945GC it would take 15W itself for it and another 6-7W for the South Bridge (Intel ICH7).

... while VIA North and South Bridge integrated in one chip can take 3.5-5W, depends on the model, including graphics.

Quote:
The newer D525 sits at 13W but that includes integrated graphics.
Yes, newer ones are better in that case, but they are slower and do not have hardware encruption accelration, for example, single core VIA Nano 1.6GB is faster then Intel Core 2 Quad @ 3.0GHz in that case.

Quote:
The Via Nano does seem to be faster, but if you look at Performance/Watt ratio, then intel seems to be doing better ...
IMHO that is mostly due to 65nm process comparing to 45nm at Intel, but still its a problem.

Also, Intel Atom does 2 instructions per clock cycle, Nano does 3, Atom does NOT support out-of-order execution while Nano does, Atom has HTT but without OS scheduler doing circles to support it properly its shit generally that can at most do 15% benefit (rather rare case).

I liked the embedded Atmos through, the Zxxx series, especially with US15W chipset that includes PowerVR graphics (same as in iPhone for example), but that shit is not open and there are no drivers for it unfortunately ... good for NAS at most.

On the other side VIA also is not bery open of it comes to drivers ... which is big mistake IMHO in their business.

Here is PREVIEW performance of VIA Nano X2, but its engeenering part, its still 65nm CPU, so stay away from power consumption tests
http://www.anandtech.com/print/4017
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind
"If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds

Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”.
vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd
Reply With Quote
  #4   (View Single Post)  
Old 4th January 2011
Carpetsmoker's Avatar
Carpetsmoker Carpetsmoker is offline
Real Name: Martin
Old man from scene 24
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 2,052
Thanked 198 Times in 156 Posts
Default

Intel is already moving to 32nm. Sandy Bridge will released next week.
__________________
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
Reply With Quote
  #5   (View Single Post)  
Old 4th January 2011
Mr-Biscuit Mr-Biscuit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 272
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

This design actually looks closer to the PowerPC design. Tell the truth, the performance may be better.
Personally, I don't think the nm size matters if the design is still inefficient.
POWER/PowerPC CPUs will slow down with a large workload but will rarely choke out. Try the same with i386/amd64 and your system will lag or stop.

Then there's the memory part. Larger amount of RAM are not necessary if the CPU is more efficient.
Coming back. The design looks good. Maybe if the company moves closer to the older RISC designs and cuts out the bottlenecking i386/amd64 is known for, the architecture will be worth it again.

2.) I think of the nm argument similar to the car size argument.:
A smaller car may be better but nothing has really improved if the engine design remains the same.
Reply With Quote
  #6   (View Single Post)  
Old 4th January 2011
Carpetsmoker's Avatar
Carpetsmoker Carpetsmoker is offline
Real Name: Martin
Old man from scene 24
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 2,052
Thanked 198 Times in 156 Posts
Default

Quote:
2.) I think of the nm argument similar to the car size argument.:
A smaller car may be better but nothing has really improved if the engine design remains the same.
If the car is smaller than that means there is less weight for the engine to haul around, and less air resistance to overcome, so it will save fuel even if the engine is the same.

Having smaller transistors and the transistors closer together means the electrons have to travel less distance and you will need fewer electrons.
__________________
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
Reply With Quote
  #7   (View Single Post)  
Old 5th January 2011
TerryP's Avatar
TerryP TerryP is offline
Arp Constable
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,547
Thanked 112 Times in 104 Posts
Default

But will electrons ever be as expensive as petrol? --> Sorry, couldn't resist that.
__________________
My Journal

Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''.
Reply With Quote
  #8   (View Single Post)  
Old 5th January 2011
Mr-Biscuit Mr-Biscuit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 272
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Diesel is more efficient than normal gasoline. Wouldn't a small car with such an engine be more efficient ?

I do understand and am aware that there are differences in performance and flags for the x86 and all related chips. That which remains is, "Why is it still an industry standard?" This is referencing only to Desktops, laptops, and small servers.

The benchmarks don't do much for the Biscuit. What would be the performance for all chips in the benchmark tests under normal conditions- a user, running whatever operating system, stressing the CPU normally- with a heavy workload?
And what of the same for graphics processing? 800x600 is not a standard output.

Does anything about the chip impress me? Yes. The implementation of load-store.
Reply With Quote
  #9   (View Single Post)  
Old 5th January 2011
Carpetsmoker's Avatar
Carpetsmoker Carpetsmoker is offline
Real Name: Martin
Old man from scene 24
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 2,052
Thanked 198 Times in 156 Posts
Default

Windows runs on x86. And *only* on x86 (Not counting ancient versions, or WinCE which is not really windows).

I think that's a big reason. Faster/better hardware is nice, but if your software won't run on it then it's just junk.

Back in the day x86 hardware was also a lot cheaper, making it available for home users, that did a lot for the popularity of the architecture.
__________________
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
Reply With Quote
Old 5th January 2011
vermaden's Avatar
vermaden vermaden is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: pl_PL.lodz
Posts: 1,051
Thanked 118 Times in 93 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-Biscuit View Post
I do understand and am aware that there are differences in performance and flags for the x86 and all related chips. That which remains is, "Why is it still an industry standard?" This is referencing only to Desktops, laptops, and small servers.
Because of 'great' company named Microsoft ... and ther even more 'great' operating system Windows ... and people ignorance about that topic in general.
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind
"If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds

Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”.
vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd
Reply With Quote
Old 6th January 2011
Carpetsmoker's Avatar
Carpetsmoker Carpetsmoker is offline
Real Name: Martin
Old man from scene 24
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 2,052
Thanked 198 Times in 156 Posts
Default

In a bit of recent news, Microsoft has announced an ARM version of Windows ...
__________________
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
Reply With Quote
Old 6th January 2011
Mr-Biscuit Mr-Biscuit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 272
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I wonder if it is related to the Windows Mobile/Phone/CE system(s).

Financial loss is more likely the contributing factor. Portable devices such as the iPad have an ARM CPU, provide a full system environment, and are generally more easy to deal with. Since the move seems to be from home to mobile, MicroSoft is slowly losing ground. Contrasting this argument is the fact that Apple and Microsoft are involved together. I digress.

Let's see the performance of all three major competitors in that market.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FreeBSD Foundation Announces Jail Based Virtualization Project J65nko News 0 11th June 2010 12:59 PM
How to detect the frequency of individual cores in a dual core processor? mc_i2020 FreeBSD General 5 18th July 2008 01:46 AM
GENERIC.MP kernel failing to boot AMD dual-core system < 75% of the time JMJ_coder NetBSD General 3 9th June 2008 01:54 PM
Dual core and FreeBSD ViperChief FreeBSD General 13 2nd June 2008 08:30 PM
Dual WAN gateway. LordZ OpenBSD Security 2 2nd June 2008 09:00 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content copyright © 2007-2010, the authors
Daemon image copyright ©1988, Marshall Kirk McKusick