facebook rss twitter

Intel ushers in second-gen Atom processor

by Parm Mann on 21 December 2009, 10:33

Tags: Intel (NASDAQ:INTC)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qavgl

Add to My Vault: x

The semiconductor industry has long touted a future in which CPUs and GPUs live together on a single die, but whilst AMD's Fusion remains merely a promise, Intel has today become the first manufacturer to integrate a memory controller and graphics core into an x86 CPU with the introduction of its second-generation Intel Atom platform.

Intel's new line of chips, previously codenamed Pineview, arrive in a trio of variants for netbook or desktop use, with each sporting a CPU, a GPU and a memory controller integrated on a single die.

For the mobile market, Intel's Atom N450 - a 45nm single-core 1.66GHz part with 512KB of L2 cache, support for Hyper-Threading and a TDP of 5.5W - is certain to feature at the heart of millions of netbooks in 2010.

Meanwhile, entry-level desktops will be treated to a pair of higher-power variants in the form of the single-core Atom D410 and dual-core D510 (pictured below). Both chips are clocked at 1.66GHz and feature 512KB or 1MB of L2 cache, respectively. Helping differentiate the parts from Intel's netbook-orientated chip, both the D410 and D510 support up to 4GB of DDR2 memory at speeds of up to 800MHz, as opposed to up to 2GB of DDR2 667MHz on the Atom N450.

Although the CPU architecture sounds familiar, what's new here is that Intel has shoehorned both a memory controller and a graphics core into the CPU itself. Intel's graphics solution takes the form of the 45nm GMA 3150, a DirectX 9 GPU clocked at 400MHz.

In terms of performance, it's certainly nothing to give NVIDIA's ION a run for its money, but it should manage 720p video playback without kicking up a fuss. Though, we expect playback of full-HD 1080p content to remain a limitation.

Given the change of architecture, Intel's Pineview CPUs are paired with a smaller, more efficient chipset known as the Intel NM10 Express. With the GPU and memory controller now residing within the CPU, Intel's chipset sports just a single chip that hooks up to the Atom processor via a 2.5GB/s DMI link. Intel claims the end result is a lower TDP, and substantial reductions in cost, overall footprint and power.

What's interesting is that Intel's specification facilitates support for an optional low-cost, third-party HD video decoder to be attached to the chipset via PCIe. We could, then, see OEMs add HD video accelerators from the likes of Broadcom in an effort to offer a little more grunt.

Nonetheless, performance clearly isn't the driving force in Intel's Atom developments. Although performance is likely to undergo a minor improvement, Pineview is all about lowering costs and increasing battery life - both of which could determine the continued success of the netbook form factor.

Expect to see the first wave of Pineview-based systems at next month's CES. In the meantime, Here's Cindy Ng from the Intel netbook marketing team in a video demonstration:



HEXUS Forums :: 7 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
I have to admit to being very disappointed by this, the ION is an example of a the chipset Intel should have provided, there new one is better but still not as good. Rather than getting a CPU performance improvement, the next generation is going to have a useless graphics card wasting transistor space if you replace it with something better. From a business point of view its great as now anyone wanting a ION must still buy an intel graphics solution. Perhaps Intel could just buy Nvida so we have the best of both worlds.
Agreeing with Oolon, but also can't help feeling this dogged insistance on single core CPUs for netbooks into 2010 is very blinkered. If netbooks are being sold with a windows-based OS, and the usual pile of shovelware that goes with it, the 2nd core becomes practically essential for smooth running, and hyperthreading really doesn't make up for it. It reminds me of when Intel were blindly sticking with Pentium4 architecture when the Pentium-M lineup (which ultimately became Core/Core2) was preferable in most respects.

Maybe 2011 will be my netbook year…
Irien
Agreeing with Oolon, but also can't help feeling this dogged insistance on single core CPUs for netbooks into 2010 is very blinkered. If netbooks are being sold with a windows-based OS, and the usual pile of shovelware that goes with it, the 2nd core becomes practically essential for smooth running, and hyperthreading really doesn't make up for it. It reminds me of when Intel were blindly sticking with Pentium4 architecture when the Pentium-M lineup (which ultimately became Core/Core2) was preferable in most respects.

Maybe 2011 will be my netbook year…
Even my Ubuntu netbook struggles and there's no crapware on it. Trouble is, you're not inclined to multitask very heavily on a netbook. And if you are, the background tasks are going to be gobbling RAM, not CPU - and we've got plenty of RAM in machines now.

So a pair of decoder units don't really seem to be needed to keep the CPU's execution units busy, because at 1.6GHz my netbook seems to have its hands full dealing with one thread.
Actually, I don't care about 1080p on a netbook at all, it's not as if you'll have a bluray drive in your netbook (or the HDD space for a bunch of bluray dumps). I do care about oodles of battery life. IMHO Intel has satisfied what 80% of the people want to do with a netbook 80% of the time. Which would be untethered internet access and general light application usage. I'm just thankful that the i945 is *finally* dead!

ION is great in a nettop or some such device. But a rather pointless waste of energy in a netbook.
if they've improved battery life on netbooks then that's a great success.
i use my netbook at school almost every single day and i can't say i've ever struggled with performance (Office 07 and now Office 10, Google Chrome, Spotify) so i can't understand why everyone wants more performance. what exactly do you want to do with it?

and the fact that it can run the iPlayer on my 1080p TV through the HDMI port is good enough for me :).

(i have a Dell Mini 10 btw)