<?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>AMD Fusion E-350 performance revealed</title>
		<description>Discuss AMD Fusion E-350 performance revealed</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 12:25:28 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/20874/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>hoohoo says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9684</link>
			<description><![CDATA["... "power efficient"??? As long as you put ZERO load on this AMD thingy, yes. Otherwise power consumption goes through the roof. ..." The power consuption roughly doubles for the AMD but same is true of the Intel chips. This thing is targetted at netbook and such. It has similar or better performance than an Atom at CPU and markedly better at GPU, with lower part part count and lower BOM - that makes it a better part from the POV of netbook makers. It's not beating the 2300 overall, that's OK, it was not supposed to. That said at GPU stuff it isn't a fail against the 2300 either. I say, compare apples to apples.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>hoohoo</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:37:00 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9684</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>valhar2000 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9531</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Accoridng to the tests I've seen, Zacate is equal in performance to an Atom with Ion 2. Power consumption under load is about equal to it's competitors in terms of performance, and in idle it beats everyone by a good margin. Any one of these things by itself is nothing to write home about, but when they are combined the result is very good indeed for the right audience. If they can sell a Zacate netbook at an equal or lower price than what a Atom+Ion2 netbook goes for these days there is simply no reason to buy an Atom anymore.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>valhar2000</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:02:05 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9531</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>yasin says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9368</link>
			<description><![CDATA[exactly.when you look at laptops, power usage is particularly relevant.this has good graphics, a good cpu, and uses not much power.why are some people expecting an i7 or something to be on this chip?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>yasin</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:09:23 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9368</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nele says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9359</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ah, my bad. Missed the last sentence... Sorry guys :oops:]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nele</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:27:30 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9359</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>JAB Creations says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9357</link>
			<description><![CDATA[AMD kicks ass if you look at WATT TO WATT comparisons at the SAME nm tech. Anyone who says anything else should watch the video demonstrations and then be promptly smacked. If my Intel Atom can play Morrowind at 640x480 with integrated graphics (albeit at the lowest settings) then I would imagine one ***MIGHT*** be able to play Oblivion on the 18watt netbook in two or three months considering it's onboard video is supposed to be the equivalent to dedicated a 5400/5500 GPU. ...and considering it's 18 watts...holy hell talk about doing more with less! :D]]></description>
			<dc:creator>JAB Creations</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:22:53 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9357</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>sirroman says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9355</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Nele, read again. Dyno is being sarcastic something like: "OF COURSE they wouldn't beat my 95w system with a 18w system".]]></description>
			<dc:creator>sirroman</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:58:31 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9355</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>redisnidma says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9352</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Don't listen to Tr0y, he's just frustrated of life: no girlfriend, still live with his parents and now he's discovering that he has some gay tendencies. ;-)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>redisnidma</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:52:01 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9352</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Tr0y says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9349</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Unlike most of you guys here I don't have a flag. All I did was criticise AMDs new platform. No word about Intel (Atom), VIA, ARM, Nvidia, ... And that makes me a fanboy how? By the way: I DO have a favorite platform: ARM's cortex family in combination with PowerVR SGX.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Tr0y</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:40:39 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9349</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nECrO says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9342</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The article was about Zacate, the comments were in response to your asinine and trollish remarks. Your fanboy flag is flying a little high today. You've been proven wrong, spanked and made yourself look foolish. Run along now. And don't forget to thank The_Countess and the others for schooling you....]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nECrO</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:14:08 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9342</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>The_Countess says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9329</link>
			<description><![CDATA[zero load is what most users put on their CPU most of the time, so its a very important metric for measuring usable battery life in the ultra-portable world. and through the roof under load? as in still much lower then the far more expensive CULV CPU that couldn't quit keep up with zecate in that benchmark? btw, here's the conclusion from the article you linked too: "Our first look at the results from AMD's Fusion technology development has impressed us *snip* this might just signal a landslide movement into the ultra-mobile market that they desperately need." yes that just screams failure...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>The_Countess</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 17:27:59 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20874-amd-fusion-e-350-performance-revealed#comment-9329</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
