Just reading about AMD's FX CPUs in anther thread, and then thinking, Intel has their 8-core Atom Avoton CPUs for servers, why don't we have a consumer version of that? Should be good for OEM marketing Lulz. Can you imagine seeing 8-core Intel-based PCs at Walmart, for $400? Could be popular. Of course, being Atom-based, with semi-horrible ST performance, buyers of such will still wonder why their web page scrolling is choppy.
I know Atom doesn't clock high, but how far off is ST performance from that of, say, Bulldozer?
So this is really a troll thread?
Depends on what you post, I guess.
If cbn can start a thread dedicated to the possibility of seeing a consumer version of the 8-core Xeon-D server SoC, then certainly I am entitled to start a thread dedicated to the possibility of seeing a consumer version of the 8-core Avoton server SoC.
A Plex transcoding server comes to mind, as one of the uses. But I think that OEM uptake, for the purposes of marketing "Intel 8-core" to the masses, should not be underestimated.
Especially when you consider the Future Shop ad that was posted here some time ago, with HP claiming that a Beema quad-core + iGPU was a "six-core" CPU. OEMs are yearning for differentiation possibilities. I think Intel should give it to them, and give us 8-core consumer Atoms.
and the microserver 8 core Atoms don't have iGPUs (making them useless for low-cost PCs).
This means Intel would need to design a special SKU just for the low-cost PC market.
I did not know that, thanks. I suppose that throws a significant cog into the works.
I know Atom doesn't clock high, but how far off is ST performance from that of, say, Bulldozer?
I could imagine that Intel might give use an Atom X9 CPU, with 8 cores and an IGP.
With Intel licensing atom to Rockchip (and Spreadtrum, I believe) this could very well happen.
I suppose that's a possibility for some far-east PC cloners / tablet makers, but I would think the the major brands of PCs sold here in the US of A, wouldn't risk their relationship with Intel, if they started sourcing their CPUs from Rockchip or Spreadtrum, even if those CPUs had Intel-designed technology inside.
I would much rather see Intel themselves offering a consumer 8-core Atom, with iGPU.
Intel wouldn't go into specifics on how the arrangement works, other than to say that Intel would work with Rockchip to do the SoC integration and Rockchip will bring its own IP to the table as well. Intel gave the example of Rockchip bringing 3rd party graphics IP to the SoC. Rockchip's existing products use ARM and Vivante GPU cores, so we may end up seeing an SoC that uses Intel x86 cores with Mali graphics.
If I'm reading this correctly it marks a big shift in Intel's approach to the mobile SoC market (and chip making in general). Intel claims the resulting SoC will be very price competitive. Leveraging Rockchip for integration likely means a substantially lower cost structure than traditional Intel SoCs. The design will continue to be fabbed at TSMC.
Each company will focus on selling the Intel-branded part to its own customers. Intel isn't disclosing how the profit sharing/revenue reporting will work. The agreement doesn't prevent Rockchip from continuing to sell ARM based SoCs and there's no financial investment from Intel in Rockchip.
Of course, being Atom-based, with semi-horrible ST performance, buyers of such will still wonder why their web page scrolling is choppy.
Interesting analysis, thanks. Can you add N2830 Atom Celeron results to the comparison?
It really surprises me that the J1900 has better scores across the board compared to the E2180. Maybe DDR3 gives it an edge. The E2180 wasn't exactly a slow CPU, that I remember.
Depends on what you post, I guess.
If cbn can start a thread dedicated to the possibility of seeing a consumer version of the 8-core Xeon-D server SoC, then certainly I am entitled to start a thread dedicated to the possibility of seeing a consumer version of the 8-core Avoton server SoC.
Of course, being Atom-based, with semi-horrible ST performance, buyers of such will still wonder why their web page scrolling is choppy.
Wasn't there some hubbub here about MediaTek fielding an 8-core (may have been BIG.little) tablet / phone SoC (ARM-based, of course).
If Intel decided to compete with that with their own 14nm tablet-oriented 8-core Atom-based SKU, then perhaps we will finally see 8-core Intel consumer desktop PCs and laptops at Walmart.
I just bought a laptop with that CPU in it, added a Samsung 850 EVO 120GB SSD, and put on Win7 64-bit. It's actually not bad, but some web pages lag it a lot when loading, so much so that the web browser turns grey, and I get a spinning circle mouse cursor. Unless the SSD is giving me problems.
How does the N2830 laptop compare to your 1007U laptop?