Friday, 03 December 2010 12:35

Intel thinks Brazos Fusion is a good thing

Written by Fuad Abazovic
fusionintel_logo_new

Nice to finally have some competition
Our sources who obviously work with both Intel and AMD have told us a quite incredible story. The first impression of Brazos in the eyes of Intel is a good one.

Intel likes it and views the Brazos platform with respect, sources who would like to remain anonymous confirmed. This is the first time ever that AMD has something that can make Intel run for its money in the mobile market.

AMD has a CPU with decent battery life and it can make life quite hard for Atoms, as Ontario looks like a more than a decent competitor. AMD has better graphics but at the same time when it comes to Zacate part of market, Intel has a better CPU core. Let’s not forget that Sandy Bridge also gets to the Pentium notebook market segment by mid-2011 and is more than ready to compete with Zacate 18W TDP dual-core parts.

We know that most users will again go for Intel, but again this time around it won't be a mistake to buy an AMD netbook, especially in the entry level market, as it will be just enough for your everyday work and it will offer quite good battery life.

We only have to see enough products on the market, as AMD was well know for announcing hundreds of designs (remember Puma) and at the end only a few were actually available. Let’s hope they can do better now, and it all starts at CES January 5th and shipping hopefully shortly after.



Last modified on Friday, 03 December 2010 13:24
blog comments powered by Disqus

Comments  

 
+46 #1 Vithren 2010-12-03 13:03
Quote:
AMD has better graphics but at the same time when it comes to Zacate part of market, Intel has a better CPU. Let’s not forget that Sandy Bridge also gets to the Pentium notebook market segmend by mid-2011 and is more than ready to compete with Zacate 18W TDP dual-core part.


Oh, so the fact that it gives Atom good spanking means nothing? Obviously it's better to compare Bobcat to chip that will be two or three times more expensive. ^^
 
 
+41 #2 valhar2000 2010-12-03 13:41
Quoting Vithren:
Oh, so the fact that it gives Atom good spanking means nothing? Obviously it's better to compare Bobcat to chip that will be two or three times more expensive. ^^


That's the way it's been working with AMD and Intel lately. People compare processors from both brands that are close in performance, and it turns out that in every segment the Intel processor outperforms the AMD one consistently, if not by much.

Then, however, you go over to a shop and compare the prices of the two processors, and what do you know? The Intel one is twice as expensive!

This isn't so bad when you look at mainstream offerings, but when you compare high-end parts it's ridiculous.
 
 
+35 #3 Jermelescu 2010-12-03 15:44
I would love a 25% increase (at least) in AMD's notebook/netbook market share :) it would be more than decent competition in this category.
 
 
+23 #4 nECrO 2010-12-03 16:29
Considering that 99% of the population uses their computer for e-mail/web surfing/word processing and their CPU sits idle 99% of the time, what does it matter?

Only Enthusiasts, professionals and gamers will see a real difference or even care.

For 99% of the population, there isn't one single compelling reason to spend the extra cash on Intel.
 
 
+21 #5 Exodite 2010-12-03 17:10
Quoting nECrO:
For 99% of the population, there isn't one single compelling reason to spend the extra cash on Intel.

While I personally prefer the AMD platform due to the overall, IMO, better design that's not entirely true.

From the introduction of the core 2 architecture up until today Intel have offered better energy efficiency which is especially noticeable in notebooks and somewhat less so in the energy bills for desktops and servers.

Here's hoping that the Fusion architecture, be it Ontario/Zacate or the future Bulldozer, will change that.
 
 
+22 #6 FnuGk 2010-12-03 17:11
Quoting nECrO:
Considering that 99% of the population uses their computer for e-mail/web surfing/word processing and their CPU sits idle 99% of the time, what does it matter?

Only Enthusiasts, professionals and gamers will see a real difference or even care.

For 99% of the population, there isn't one single compelling reason to spend the extra cash on Intel.


did you know that 99% of all numbers on the internet is made up?
 
 
+18 #7 The_Wolf88 2010-12-03 17:17
Let's see what Intel will say after Bulldozer wipes out the Core i series !!

I bet they will use their tricky moves one from P4 era one again !!
 
 
-7 #8 yourma2000 2010-12-03 19:37
I hear everyone talking about Bulldozer as if it is a monster revolutionary CPU, but what makes this so? I've not seen any real info about it on the internet
 
 
+9 #9 The_Countess 2010-12-04 01:30
@yourma2000
BD is going to give you more cores for less money, but without compromising on single threaded performance.
I'm not sure its going to be as fast as sandy bridge in single threaded apps but its going to be faster then current phenoms II's and offer as many or more cores as current offerings at much lower production costs
its turbo mode (rumoured to be about 500mhz more) will be turn on full on all cores for almost all workloads according to AMD. that's what BD will do, and it should do all that at a lower power consumption because of the shared components and the ability to turns off individual modules
 
 
+6 #10 Bl0bb3r 2010-12-04 02:19
@The_Countess, lets not get ahead of ourselves. yourma2000 is right, first see tests, then judge. Look what happened to Bobcat... it was praised as a killer product, it's better than Atom but can't keep up with lower Pentiums or VIA Nano and roughly the same power usage. Not exactly a killer, but still good.
 

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments