Digitimes: New processors from Via

[IntelUser2000]

So can anyone tell me why I might to use a VIA processor over software for security? Or does this Padlock RNG simply a way to make existing security software work better?

Because. It's really fast. While the general performance might be only 20-30% over the Atom, the cryptography performance on the Nano can reach 2-3x the quad core Core i7.

Though the AES-NI in Westmere makes Intel chips the king again, there are some algorithms that Westmere doesn't accelerate that Via does.

 

[cbn]

Because. It's really fast. While the general performance might be only 20-30% over the Atom, the cryptography performance on the Nano can reach 2-3x the quad core Core i7.

Though the AES-NI in Westmere makes Intel chips the king again, there are some algorithms that Westmere doesn't accelerate that Via does.

Thank you for the answer. What you are saying about "Cryptography" sounds really interesting.

Hmmm....this makes we wonder in what circumstances would a VIA processor be a better fit for an individual?

EDIT: http://www.via.com.tw/en/resources/pressroom/pressrelease.jsp?press_release_no=2727

News Release
VIA Nano Processor: World's Safest, Most Power Efficient Cryptography for Mini-notes and x86-based Computers
New SiSoftware Sandra 2009 benchmarking software includes measurable cryptographic tests showing the VIA Nano™ processor using only 5% of the power and almost double the speed of competing CPUs

Taipei, Taiwan, 14 October 2008 - VIA Technologies, Inc, a leading innovator of power efficient x86 processor platforms, today showed that the cryptographic performance of the VIA Nano processor is the most power efficient on the market, due to its dedicated VIA PadLock™ Security Engine, a suite of security tools integrated directly into the processor die.

The hardware security implementation within the VIA Nano processor means that user data is handled more efficiently and safely by circuitry deep inside the silicon, rather than by using more vulnerable operating system, memory and software resources.

The benchmarking of the 1.3GHz VIA Nano processor using SiSoftware's newest release of the SiSoftware Sandra 2009 diagnostic utility showed the VIA Nano processor performing the cryptographic tests at a blazing 765MB/s of bandwidth, over 93% faster than a 3.2GHz Intel® Core™2 Quad QX9770 processor, yet using a mere 5% of the power.

"Fast, power efficient and safe data encryption are quickly becoming a top concern of mobile PC users," said Richard Brown, Vice President of Marketing, VIA Technologies, Inc. "Data protection and identity theft for lost and stolen devices are issues that are compounded by the growth of the mobile computing market, key areas where the VIA Nano processor can significantly help protect users data."

"Cryptography has become an important part of our digital life: it allows us to conduct safe transactions online, certify programs and services, keep our data secure and much more." said C. Adrian Silasi, CTO, SiSoftware. "The speed at which cryptographic operations (encryption, decryption, hashing, signing) can be performed is thus very much important."

The VIA PadLock Security Engine integrated wholly into the VIA Nano processor enabling secure computing by adding extra functions (opcodes) to the processor that gives programmers a whole suite of tools which, when implemented, can make data unreadable to unauthorized users (data encryption), and help prevent attacks from hackers and worms. More information about VIA Padlock Security Engine and open source data encryption applications for Windows and Linux based devices can be found here:
http://www.via.com.tw/en/initiatives/padlock/whyhardwareisbetter.jsp

and a short video showing the performance testing results for a VIA Nano 1.3GHz based VIA OpenBook can be viewed here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvRUIlYApQo
About the VIA Nano Processor

The first 64-bit, superscalar processors in VIA's x86 platform portfolio, VIA Nano processors have been specifically designed to revitalize traditional desktop and notebook PC markets, delivering truly optimized performance and security for the most demanding computing, entertainment and connectivity applications.

The VIA Nano processor family leverages advanced 65 nanometer process technology for enhanced power efficiency, and augments that with aggressive power and thermal management features within the compact 21mm x 21mm nanoBGA2 package for an idle power as low as 100mW (0.1W), extending the reach of power efficient green and silent PCs, thin and light notebooks and mini-notes around the world. For further information on the VIA Nano processor family, please visit the VIA website at: http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/processors/nano/
About SiSoftware

SiSoftware, founded in 1995, is one of the leading providers of computer analysis, diagnostic and benchmarking software. The flagship product, known as "SANDRA", was launched in 1997 and has become one of the most widely used products in its field. Nearly 600 worldwide IT publications, magazines and review sites use SANDRA to analyse the performance of today's computers. Over 7,000 on-line reviews of computer hardware that use SANDRA are catalogued on our website alone.

Since launch, SiSoftware has always been at the forefront of the technology arena, being among the first providers of benchmarks that show the power of emerging new technologies like multi-core, GPGPU, AMD64/EM64T/x64, IA64, NUMA, SMT (Hyper-Threading), SMP (multi-threading), AVX, FMA, SSE4.2, SSE4.1, SSE4A, SSSE3, SSE3, SSE2, SSE, MMX, Java and .NET.

SiSoftware is located in London, UK. For more information, please visit http://www.sisoftware.net or http://www.sisoftware.co.uk
About VIA Technologies, Inc.

VIA Technologies, Inc is the foremost fabless supplier of power efficient x86 processor platforms that are driving system innovation in the PC, client, ultra mobile and embedded markets. Combining energy-saving processors with digital media chipsets and advanced connectivity, multimedia and networking silicon enables a broad spectrum of computing and communication platforms, including its widely acclaimed ultra compact mainboards. Headquartered in Taipei, Taiwan, VIA's global network links the high tech centers of the US, Europe and Asia, and its customer base includes the world's top OEMs and system integrators. www.via.com.tw

 

[Fox5]

It didn't even perform like the 65nm K8. It looks like it trailed the original Pentium M Banias by 20-30%.
The lead could have been greater against the Atom, but Hyperthreading on the Atom core helps a lot.

The C7 trailed the Atom, but it was ridiculously cheap and the packaging was small.

So the end result we have:

C7 + 20-30% = Atom
Atom + 20-30% = Nano
Nano + 20-30% = Pentium M

That seems overly optimistic for the C7. Atom competes with the P4, clock per clock, C7 only did about half the performance of a P4 at the same clock from what I remember.

 

[Cogman]

Via's CPU ship has sailed. With both AMD and Intel now making ultra low power CPUs, there is no way a VIA CPU can compete.

 

[Soulkeeper]

Although I still get excited hearing news about via products, it takes VIA forever to get something to market after announcing it.
They were talking about a dual core version following shortly when they first released the single core nano. I won't hold my breath.

 

[IntelUser2000]

That seems overly optimistic for the C7. Atom competes with the P4, clock per clock, C7 only did about half the performance of a P4 at the same clock from what I remember.

Oh, right. Multi-threaded software makes the comparison complex. But for single threaded performance the numbers for C7 vs Atom are roughly correct.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-atom-cpu,1947-9.html

It's also well possible the media units on the Atom is more powerful than on the C7. That will make it seem perform higher than the overall IPC its capable of.

And since I haven't seen a review that properly compares a C7 to a P4 per clock, that's difficult to say. Media performance will obviously skew the comparison because Pentium 4's architecture is optimized for it, like the beefy SSE unit.

 

[Idontcare]

Via's CPU ship has sailed. With both AMD and Intel now making ultra low power CPUs, there is no way a VIA CPU can compete.

I agree, their niche just got invaded. The invasion from Intel wasn't too impressive because Intel used that 130nm chipset so the platform power-consumption wasn't overly impressive relative to Nano at the time.

But one might say AMD is about to "Bobcat" their market inasmuch as Intel Conroed AMD's.

Great news for everyone except Via employees and shareholders. The quadcore chip to which this thread was created is great news...but is it really going to hold a candle to Zacate? I don't see it happening.

 

[cbn]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4017/vias-dual-core-nano-vn1000-chipset-previewed

Sounds like we will be seeing a bobcat vs Nano comparison soon.

The biggest competitor for Nano may not end up being Intel after all. AMD's Bobcat is due to ship to OEMs before the end of the year, and before the end of the week we'll have our full performance preview of it.

 

[Idontcare]

Both Via's Nano design team and AMD's Bobcat design team are based in Texas IIRC...showdown at the Alamo!

(and both chips are made by TSMC...so maybe the showdown is actually inside the fab )

 

[Cogman]

Both Via's Nano design team and AMD's Bobcat design team are based in Texas IIRC...showdown at the Alamo!

(and both chips are made by TSMC...so maybe the showdown is actually inside the fab )

I just have a hard time seeing the bobcat lose in any catagory compared to the nano. After all, they were measuring its GPU performance to intel's craptastic video cards.

It might be competitive in the CPU side, but on power and video performance there is no way it will be competitive.

 

[Absolution75]

If this is priced correctly - it could still be a big hit in the HTPC market. It looks to be pretty good - on paper.

VIA's launches have been a little uhh, less than stellar. They need to get bought out by a company that is competent so they can fire all the management.

 

[exar333]

Am I the only person that thought the AT preview/review for Nano was really bad? For starters, different processors are shown on the power consumption page vs. the overall performance. Secondly, no performance/watt was included (criminal for this type of review). Sloppy review. Atom is no powerhouse, but it does it at very slow power usage. I wanted to see some real comparisons between Atom and Nano. Poorly done AT...