<?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>Intel developing new Atom architecture</title>
		<description>Discuss Intel developing new Atom architecture</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22709-intel-developing-new-atom-architecture</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 16:28:06 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/22709/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>loadwick says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22709-intel-developing-new-atom-architecture#comment-22644</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Intel really surprises me with some of its decisions. Personally i would have thought that given Intel are way behind ARM in low power mobile chips they would be doing everything they could to get their Atoms on the smallest available die process they can. But instead they seem to leave these till the very last things to change over. I might be wrong but i don't even think that Atoms are on the 32nm process yet thats been around for years! The smaller the die the less power it will use and so the less cooling it will need. It can't be a complicated chip either so don't see what the massive hold up is. If they made this Silvermont the first 22nm chip, almost like a testing chip, then they might have a chance against ARM.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>loadwick</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 12:41:02 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/22709-intel-developing-new-atom-architecture#comment-22644</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
