Australian IT - Intel touts new laptop chip (Scott Hillis in San
Francisco, DECEMBER 14, 2005)
http://australianit.news.com.au/arti...nbv%5E,00.html

Albeit, the article is not perfect:

> Napa comes as Intel's chief rival, AMD, makes inroads in laptop computers with its line of Turion chips. AMD is looking to trump Intel next year by being the first to launch a 64-bit mobile processor.

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 00:32:23 -0500, Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Australian IT - Intel touts new laptop chip (Scott Hillis in San
>Francisco, DECEMBER 14, 2005)
>http://australianit.news.com.au/arti...nbv%5E,00.html

Doesn't work for me but no matter: according to the quote you have below,
which also appears here
http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuot...3362603_newsml
it's just a Reuters article.

>Albeit, the article is not perfect:
>
>> Napa comes as Intel's chief rival, AMD, makes inroads in laptop computers with its line of Turion chips. AMD is looking to trump Intel next year by being the first to launch a 64-bit mobile processor.

Yeah, I guess what an anal...yst doesn't know just doesn't exist. Who are
those people and how do they hold down a job?

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 08:53:21 -0500, George Macdonald
<fammacd=!SPAM^(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Yeah, I guess what an anal...yst doesn't know just doesn't exist. Who are
>those people and how do they hold down a job?
>
>--
>Rgds, George Macdonald

In order to climb the corporate ladder, it is paramount to have
excellent brownnosing skills. The rest is optional.

NNN

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 00:32:23 -0500, Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Australian IT - Intel touts new laptop chip (Scott Hillis in San
>Francisco, DECEMBER 14, 2005)
>http://australianit.news.com.au/arti...nbv%5E,00.html
>
>Albeit, the article is not perfect:
>
>> Napa comes as Intel's chief rival, AMD, makes inroads in laptop computers with its line of Turion chips. AMD is looking to trump Intel next year by being the first to launch a 64-bit mobile processor.

Hmm, I dunno who else complained but it's been corrected at Yahoo.Reuters:
http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuot...3362603_newsml

"...... and has one-upped Intel by being the first to launch a 64-bit
mobile processor."

I guess "trumped" would have been too strong for Intel to stomach as an
established fact.:-)

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

George Macdonald wrote:
> Hmm, I dunno who else complained but it's been corrected at Yahoo.Reuters:
> http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuot...3362603_newsml

It might have been me. I'm just too impatient. :-)

>
> "...... and has one-upped Intel by being the first to launch a 64-bit
> mobile processor."
>
> I guess "trumped" would have been too strong for Intel to stomach as an
> established fact.:-)
>

But there were other hard-to-stomach quotes in there about Intel:

> "Napa will make Intel a more capable competitor against AMD's products. AMD is having a modicum of success in mobile," said Nathan Brookwood, head of semiconductor research firm Insight 64.

Brookwood saying "will make Intel a more capable competitor against AMD"
is just a kick in the balls isn't it?

Yousuf Khan

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:14:59 -0500, Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>George Macdonald wrote:
>> Hmm, I dunno who else complained but it's been corrected at Yahoo.Reuters:
>> http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuot...3362603_newsml
>
>It might have been me. I'm just too impatient. :-)
>
>>
>> "...... and has one-upped Intel by being the first to launch a 64-bit
>> mobile processor."
>>
>> I guess "trumped" would have been too strong for Intel to stomach as an
>> established fact.:-)
>>
>
>But there were other hard-to-stomach quotes in there about Intel:
>
>> "Napa will make Intel a more capable competitor against AMD's products. AMD is having a modicum of success in mobile," said Nathan Brookwood, head of semiconductor research firm Insight 64.
>
>Brookwood saying "will make Intel a more capable competitor against AMD"
>is just a kick in the balls isn't it?

Err, just a modicum of one.:-)

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:14:59 -0500, Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>George Macdonald wrote:
>> Hmm, I dunno who else complained but it's been corrected at Yahoo.Reuters:
>> http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuot...3362603_newsml
>
>It might have been me. I'm just too impatient. :-)
>
>>
>> "...... and has one-upped Intel by being the first to launch a 64-bit
>> mobile processor."
>>
>> I guess "trumped" would have been too strong for Intel to stomach as an
>> established fact.:-)
>>
>
>But there were other hard-to-stomach quotes in there about Intel:
>
>> "Napa will make Intel a more capable competitor against AMD's products. AMD is having a modicum of success in mobile," said Nathan Brookwood, head of semiconductor research firm Insight 64.
>
>Brookwood saying "will make Intel a more capable competitor against AMD"
>is just a kick in the balls isn't it?
>
> Yousuf Khan

Or a reference to
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/200...mato_centrino/
AMD unwraps notebook reference platform

On the surface of it, Napa/Yonah doesn't look anymore such a clear-cut
winner. If Pentium M scales up with the number of cores the way P!!!
did (I see no better reference, since PM is derived from good old P6
core - PPro->P!!! - and has very little in common with netbust Xeons
of today), and Turion64 scales like A64X2, Napa would have quite some
catching up to do in performance department. And if the AMD target of
5 hours of battery life is reached, that will make them competitive in
thin-n-light ultra-mobility dept., now occupied exclusively by
Centrino.

NNN

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 20:47:31 GMT, "(E-Mail Removed)"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:14:59 -0500, Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote:
>>> "Napa will make Intel a more capable competitor against AMD's products. AMD is having a modicum of success in mobile," said Nathan Brookwood, head of semiconductor research firm Insight 64.
>>
>>Brookwood saying "will make Intel a more capable competitor against AMD"
>>is just a kick in the balls isn't it?
>>
>Or a reference to
>http://www.channelregister.co.uk/200...mato_centrino/
>AMD unwraps notebook reference platform
>
>On the surface of it, Napa/Yonah doesn't look anymore such a clear-cut
>winner. If Pentium M scales up with the number of cores the way P!!!
>did (I see no better reference, since PM is derived from good old P6
>core - PPro->P!!! - and has very little in common with netbust Xeons
>of today),

One of the key differences here is that the Pentium-M DOES share the
same bus as the Xeon, which offers significantly more bandwidth than
the old PIII bus. As such, it should scale to dual-core much better
than an old PIII might.

Of course, the Athlon64 should scale even better to dual-cores due to
it's integrated memory controller and hypertransport design.

> and Turion64 scales like A64X2, Napa would have quite some
>catching up to do in performance department. And if the AMD target of
>5 hours of battery life is reached, that will make them competitive in
>thin-n-light ultra-mobility dept., now occupied exclusively by
>Centrino.

I really don't like those "battery hour" figures when used in
reference to CPUs. Usually the highest power consumer of a modern
laptop is the display, not the CPU. Hard drives, memory and video
chips all figure in to the equation for power consumption. On the
other side of things is the battery size, which varies widely from one
notebook to another. I'd much rather the processor makes talk about
actual watts of their chips.

Still, I don't think that the dual-core Turion's will be entirely out
of firing range of the dual-core "Yonah" Pentium-M chips. They should
be at least able to get down into the "ML" range of 35W (vs. ~25-30W
for the Pentium-M). Of course, there is also the chipsets to
consider, and I understand that mobile chipsets for AMD processors
(from nVidia and ATI) currently consume more power than those from
Intel (if anyone has any numbers here, please feel free to share
them!).

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

Tony Hill wrote:
> One of the key differences here is that the Pentium-M DOES share the
> same bus as the Xeon, which offers significantly more bandwidth than
> the old PIII bus. As such, it should scale to dual-core much better
> than an old PIII might.

Plus, unlike the kludged-up P4 DC's, I think the Yonahs will be using an
internal communications channel, instead of going out over the FSB.

> I really don't like those "battery hour" figures when used in
> reference to CPUs. Usually the highest power consumer of a modern
> laptop is the display, not the CPU. Hard drives, memory and video
> chips all figure in to the equation for power consumption. On the
> other side of things is the battery size, which varies widely from one
> notebook to another. I'd much rather the processor makes talk about
> actual watts of their chips.

An interesting observation was made about the relative battery lives of
Turion vs. Pentium-M: Turions conserve more energy under average
workloads, while P-M conserves more energy under heavy load. The only
reason I can think of this difference is that both chips will use no
more than its rated maximum energy consumption under heavy loads, but
usually P-M has a lower consumption rating than typical Turion (typical
Turions are usually an ML @ 35W, rather than the more trifty MT @ 25W).

But under average loads, their automatic power management is keeping
them well under maximum consumption ratings. So it's possible that the
AMD power management is doing a better job of keeping Turion under its
maximum power consumption than the P-M's power manager is.

>
> Still, I don't think that the dual-core Turion's will be entirely out
> of firing range of the dual-core "Yonah" Pentium-M chips. They should
> be at least able to get down into the "ML" range of 35W (vs. ~25-30W
> for the Pentium-M). Of course, there is also the chipsets to
> consider, and I understand that mobile chipsets for AMD processors
> (from nVidia and ATI) currently consume more power than those from
> Intel (if anyone has any numbers here, please feel free to share
> them!).

I have no figures.

Yousuf Khan

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 10:59:33 -0500, Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>An interesting observation was made about the relative battery lives of
>Turion vs. Pentium-M: Turions conserve more energy under average
>workloads, while P-M conserves more energy under heavy load. The only
>reason I can think of this difference is that both chips will use no
>more than its rated maximum energy consumption under heavy loads, but
>usually P-M has a lower consumption rating than typical Turion (typical
>Turions are usually an ML @ 35W, rather than the more trifty MT @ 25W).
>
>But under average loads, their automatic power management is keeping
>them well under maximum consumption ratings. So it's possible that the
>AMD power management is doing a better job of keeping Turion under its
>maximum power consumption than the P-M's power manager is.

What is the absolute performance of the said chip at said full load?
Does the Turion/P-M has a higher peak performance or similar?

Similarly, at average load, which is faster?

--
A Lost Angel, fallen from heaven
Lost in dreams, Lost in aspirations,
Lost to the world, Lost to myself