<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Ontario CPU hits nano ITX</title>
		<description>Discuss Ontario CPU hits nano ITX</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 15:12:13 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/20526/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>X86news says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6444</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ontario has no need to go down to 32 or 22nm, Ontario currently has about twice as many transistors as a Dual core Atom paired with a GMA3150?, but takes up the same amount of space? You see there are different types of transistors, and claiming that all we need is less nm and everything will magically get better strikes me as naive, I seem to remember a certain 130-90nm transition that went terribly wrong, a certain Prescott perhaps?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>X86news</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 00:23:32 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6444</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nECrO says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6385</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Tr0y Don't make asinine statements and you won't get smart comments and negative feedback. I admitted I wasn't familiar w/ Sandy Bridge specs. That aside I was sure you were comparing apples to Oranges. (Something you shot your big mouth off and accused BlueFear of) And I was right. 1 20W part doesn't compare to a 9W part. Stop posting flame bait, then whining like a little girl when you get negative feedback. Try forming an intelligent opinion and sharing it. Fat chance. Trolls will be trolls.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nECrO</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:02:24 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6385</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Modr says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6301</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Will Nvidia make an "Ion" version? Will it always have Physx disabled since there is an AMD GPU?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Modr</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 23:33:34 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6301</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Tr0y says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6299</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@"Blue Fear" Wow. Here comes another numskull ... Ontario (that's the thing the article is about - read the headline) is 40nm - not 32. Other Bullldozer designs *may* be 32nm. But they are delayed. Only god knows when AMD can finally deliver. And your statement about AMD going 28nm for GPUs ... means what? Nothing! You are comparing apples and oranges. Hynix offers 20nm NAND chips ... does that mean they can do CPU with 20nm as well? OR GPUs? Besides ... AMD *plans* to go 28 "pretty soon". Whatever that means. AMD is really awesome - when it comes to announcements ...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Tr0y</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 22:11:31 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6299</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Blue Fear says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6296</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You really don't have to be an ass when someone debates with you especially if they were elaborating. We all benefit from everyone's input. For the record AMD gets to go 28nm pretty soon on the gpu front, Bulldozer is 32nm so it's nothing to be concerned over considering if it beats Sandy Bridge clock for clock. (I among others would hope)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Blue Fear</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 20:01:56 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6296</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Tr0y says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6295</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yes thats the problem here: You admit having no idea - but that doesn't stop you from posting your s*it! TDP for Sandy Bridge starts at 20W for the LV and ULV variants. Sandy Bridge is 32nm, Ivy Bridge (coming Q3/2011) will be 22nm! Which means even less power consumption. Much less than AMDs 40nm process. I wonder when AMD will be able to manage the 22nm process? Maybe in 2038 ...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Tr0y</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 19:24:59 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6295</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Wolfesteinabhi says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6291</link>
			<description><![CDATA[well its true that intel is coming up with the Sandy Bridge with a better cpu performance..but with graphics it would still be beaten by Ontario which has decent CPU compared to Sandy Bridge ...n yeah Pricing as well ..as far as AMD goes :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Wolfesteinabhi</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:46:11 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6291</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nECrO says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6289</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You do realize your comparing a 9W CPU/GPU to a, What 95W... 125W (I have no idea what the TDP is for Sandy Bridge.) part? I am giving you the benefit of the doubt since that would be silly. One of these chips would go nicely into a Android based tablet, yes?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nECrO</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:34:38 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6289</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Tr0y says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6283</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Intels upcoming Sandy Bridge also has CPU and GPU on one die. [UPDATE] Are you guys nuts here? Just mentioning Intel or NVidia gives me -24 ???]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Tr0y</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 15:59:26 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6283</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Blue Fear says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6282</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Just as top tier performance has its place so do low power cost efficient form factors which play the opposite extreme in the enthusiast market. Intel made a half hearted effort because it was too focused on one extreme of the market. AMD has diversified itself through struggle these past years but with great promise and future success ahead for itself. This will prove to be a triumph on current and upcoming trends.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Blue Fear</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 15:55:55 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20526-ontario-cpu-hits-nano-itx#comment-6282</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
