AMD says it'll detail its Atom-challenging plans in November
By Donald Melanson 
posted July 18th 2008 2:35PM
posted July 18th 2008 2:35PM
AMD has been hinting at its plans to take on Intel's processor du jour, the Atom, for some time now, but brand new CEO Dirk Meyer is now getting slightly more official about it than the company has been previously, and he's promising that AMD will reveal all come November. As the folks at Register Hardware point out, all indications point to that Atom-challenging processor being the "Bobcat," which has been talked about for nearly a full year now. If that past information is correct, it looks like we can expect the chip to debut with a 1GHz clock speed, along with 128KB of L1 cache, 256KB of L2 cache an 800MHz HyperTransport link, support for 400MHz DDR 2 RAM, and a power consumption 8W. No word on how AMD plans to compete with Intel in terms of price just yet, but that'll no doubt be revealed in November, if not sooner.
So we can expect a (from what I am reading up there) worse processor arriving much later than Intel's.
...go AMD.
It seems to be AMD's track record lately. Hope they get ahead soon.
Well, if Bobcat has out-of-order instructions it will have a huge advantage over Atom. Notice how the 900mhz Celeron in the original EeePC is actually faster than the 1.6ghz Atom? This could be the same, if not better. Also note that AMD has had lower wattage CPUs for a while, but they were hardly used, called the AMD Geode, so this isn't coming otu of nowhere.
Where did you read that it would be a worse processor. We don't know the details just yet so please stop assuming you know everything.
@Minilap
Shut up. It'll be worse and you AMD fanboys (I can not believe that any still exist) need to just stop with the ridiculous idea that it MIGHT BE BETTER! Yeah, right. Things have been getting worse for them, not better. Odds are (those odds being 100%) that Intel has more money, better R&D, and are several steps ahead of them already.
That was so lame that I couldn't even figure a proper reply to it.
Fast figures:
Atom ~= Netburst IPC
Bobcat ~= K8 IPC
It took a 5.2Ghz P4 to beat a 2.6Ghz Athlon FX. Repetition again?
@Mikeo
Here in the real world it's 2008. Believe it or not, AMD is falling to pieces in this new time. You and the other AMD hopefuls should join us here sometime.
Here in the real world it's 2008. Believe it or not, the atom is still based off netburst (P5) and not the core (P6) architecture.
AMD has been out with the Geode processor for a couple of years. The Geode LX900 performs arguably better then the Intel Atom processor and consumes even lower power then the Intel Atom processor. AMD's Geode is in the OLPC XO-1, PepperPad, Raon Everun UMPC, Digital Cube UMPC and more.
The Intel Atom consumes closer to 12W when you include the northbridge. So this AMD bobcat would totally match that and better.
@Charbax
Wow, that list of devices is like the who's who of who cares.
For every device you list there you could also list 4 that are using the Atom.
I am not an Intel fanboy by any means, a good proc is a good proc. But the simple fact is that they've quickly regained their territory and aren't letting go. A NOVEMBER (so far!) release is not going to do AMD any good...
You can all throw "WELL COMPETITION IS GOOD" angles all over the place, but in reality right now it's becoming very quickly one sided. Intel is doing a great job though and keeps things affordable, so there's no reason to be up in arms over their dominance yet. Especially with NVidia breathing down their necks...
All we know for a fact is that Pochi here who's acting as if he knows it all is an assh0le.
Well, no, he's not.
AMD have dropped the ball big style because every CPU they've released for the last couple of years has been inferior to Intel's offerings.
There's no point releasing chips that are:
a) Not as good as the competitor's.
b) Come out late than the competitor's.
c0 Aren't that much cheaper than the competitor's.
Because you just get spanked and, oh I don't know, lose over a billion dollars in profit.
AMD are in the last chance saloon here.
@Pochi
"For every device you list there you could also list 4 that are using the Atom."
It doesn't take long for the tables to turn. Consumers with a technical mind will jump ship in a second for a good performance vs price ratio.
If AMD and 'Bobcat' are sucessful, there's a good chance they'll be cheaper than Intel's Atom chips. Using less power and being cheaper they will undoubtedly be the favoured choice for netbooks.
I'm no AMD fanboy, but lets face it, the netbook market is rapidly growing and if AMD can reduce prices and power consumption while providing similar performance to Intel chips (although this is yet to be seen), good luck to them.
I have been hearing this news since Dell cut off the partnership with Intel. It was like 3 years ago? I guess they are not going to make it especially during this hard time. The saying from the CEO is just a boosting of their price stock I suppose!
i dont realy like amd and he's logo (sing)
That's because you are either mentally ill or just plain ignorant.
Why is AMD trying to counter Intel's move into a market that their own CEO admitted the other day wasn't as profitable as the mainstream desktop and mobile market? Maybe they should focus on turning a profit there first before they start worrying about expanding into smaller niche markets.
But hey, they've already posted losses for the last seven quarters straight, why not go for broke and make it an even eight?
How do you know it will be slower? The A64 1.8ghz beat a P4 4.0ghz in benchmarks, the A64 had a lower clock speed AND less cache. Just because the atom is 600mhz more than the bobcat and has a little more cache doesn't mean the bobcat is a "worse processor". It all comes down to the architecture.
So, from what you are saying, AMD's processor could be 60% more efficient than Intel's Atom?
You really see that happening? If so, more power to you. You're a man of extreme (and mistaken) faith.
i understand your concern. assuming bobcat uses a completely clock rate (which is actually likely) so that comparing clock speed directly doesn't make sense. but atom has 512KB L2 cache while bobcat has 256KB, atom draws 2.5W while bobcat draws 8W. those numbers don't seem to be right.
The atom also uses 8... At least the one used in netbooks. The cache means less since the bobcat will use an on die memory controller.
I don't think Intel needs to worry about an ATOM challenger when AMD just posted $1.2 billion loss the quarter (not the year).
AMD just had a wet dream and their marketing people sent out a press release.
First of all, its obvious that many of you don't understand basic economics.
They did not LOSE $1.2 BILLION IN PHYSICAL ASSETS --- 75% OF THAT IS A WRITE-DOWN RELATED TO THE ATI MERGER! Their real loss was around $300 millions, still significant, but nowhere near 4x that.
Dear amd please release a 12 core processor and beat intel, thanks
These will supposedly drain 8W for 1GHZ, and that's more efficient than the Atom?
We'll check back in November and see who "has no understanding or caring" (wtf? is that English?) when AMD launches these.
by the time its released ill already have my atom processor in the msi wind, and thats by september with a 6 cell battery.
unless this makes things ULTRA cheap.
regardless, november is LATE. really really late.
The MSI Wind is nice. But the AMD based OLPC is 4 times cheaper and performs running a browser just about as well if not better.
Someone such as MSI, Acer, Quanta or any other Taiwaneese laptop manufacturer simply needs to take the AMD Geode or Bobcat and put it in a laptop, that solution is about half the price of Intel based solutions and consumes even lower power.
Ever dreamed of a 20-hour battery life? Get an AMD Geode based OLPC laptop.
Damn...
This is what i want from amd:
A good cheap Desktop processor that outperfroms Intel, and good overclocking.
A good cheap Laptop processor that is at least as good as intel and is COOL and efficient.
That is it. It does not need to go into any other markets. If it gives those 2 chips, than Intel will be fucked.
I just dont get AMD. It seems as though they have no clue what is going on at Intel. Like a year later they release plans to release a competitor. When Intel gives a press release it is normally only 3-5 months before the chip gets released.
Maybe AMD should keep everything a secret, then Intel will have a lag to catch up (like AMD is playing catch up now).
I am very underwhelmed at AMD these past 2 years. Intel has brought its A-game. If AMD goes under than processor improvements will most likely come to a slow crawl. The only reason Intel has been so kick ass these past years is because AMD stepped up and made a better chip then them.
What I want from AMD, is that they commercialize the OLPC laptop, if they can release a $199 laptop and sell it by the millions in all supermarkets and put AMD logos on all the laptops in the developping markets, that will be a guaranteed success.
AMD needs to be bold, take what's there and commercialize it.
Will they still exist by then?
The important thing isn't the clock speed on their Atom competitor, its whether or not its an out-of-order processor.
The Atom is an in-order processor, which means its really slow for a 1.6 GHz chip. Luckily, because of its long pipeline, hyperthreading does give it a boost.
If the AMD offering is a 1.0 GHz 8W out-of-order chip, there might be some good competition here for Intel, just like Via's Nano chip.
AMD badly nneds to focus on doing just a few things VERY well. Coming to market more than a year after Intel is a way to lose the rest of their capital.
Actually the Atom requires a 6W northbridge, so the actual consumption (total) is 0.5W higher.
AMD has alot of potential but it isnt playing its cards right.. probably because of a lack of funds. If they can figure out a way to use their ATI purchase to make some insane gpu/cpu solution it would be amazing.
Ha. Intel was trying to do that. They are trying to make one core on their multi core processors dedicated to graphical rendering. But seeing how gpu has such unique specifications and insane memory configurations, i don't see how it's possible right now.
It's called Fusion and it will involve both Bobcat, Bulldozer (next-gen desktop), and Stars (Phenom). As far as I know, the 1-10W TDP that is being tossed around for Bobcat includes the GPU that will be on the same chip. Note that this will increase speed (there is no bus the CPU and GPU have to connect through) and probably vastly simplify (or possibly eliminate) the northbridge.
Everyone talks about how Core 2 came out of nowhere and stomped AMD, but no one is talking about how R700 is doing the same thing now in the GPU market, only vice-versa. AMD/ATI were completely marginalized for a generation, only selling mid-range cards. Now they are back on top with a card that force Nvidia to cut prices. Nvidia is nearly as big of a company as AMD selling only video cards and chipsets, a competitive Radeon seems like it can only help AMD in the long run.
This processor needs to be really good. if it is announced in november, who knows how long it will be until it is actually released. It looks to me like this thing is going head to head with moorstown. However, even if it does become available when they announce it, based on the TDP, it will be going up against the atom 330.
AMD is playing too much catch up and failing at it. What happend to the time when AMD led the multi-core transformation? AMD, you gotta put on your thinking caps and make things, not copy.
Intel Atom consumes closer to 12W and performs worse then advertised (mhz doesn't mean much).
AMD has been out with a fanless processor for much longer then Intel, AMD's Geode was released more than 2 years ago and is truely fanless, Intel Atom still needs a fan to cool it down.
Pochi, it completely depends on the architecture, see 'Core' versus 'netburst' as a pointed example.
Anybody know if this chip will be in-order like the Atom?
So basically we'll get a whitepaper and a PowerPoint slideshow demoing something that will end up sucking hard, but cost less then Intel's wares....Got it.
Yah know. I want to root for AMD. I really do. Its like seeing someone in a helmet stand up to the school bully. He's got spunk. He's got panache. He also is the person who's underwear is hanging from the school's flagpole at the end of the school day. But again, I want to root for AMD, but spunk doesn't make me buy a processor.
wow you did something other than trash apple. first time trying not to be a dick?
When there are no Apple fanbois around being dicks themselves, yes. (Say for example the idiots who were posting every other thread about the iPhone.) Yes I can. Its called MAD for a reason. You play nice. I play nice. You act like a dick....well.
PS- If you knew me you would also know my Apple comments are maybe 1% of my posts. Now my comments are retards on the site who make the world's most ridiculous comments that drag civilization down a few IQ points....that is probably around 30%.
No wonder the CEO was canned, the Geode sucked (have one), this sounds worse than the Atom (got one)! Git your ass back to the drawing board AMD and provide some proper competition for Intel!
http://xkcd.com/325/
This is not exciting.
AMD should take on Atom and Larrabee (next-gen hybrid CPU / GPU, for Nehalem generation) with one chip. This chip would have 4 or 8 cores that would get the advantages of a shared cache.
AMD needs to choose a core that they already have running, so that this project can get to market fast. The Geodes (AMD Geode LX900 @600mhz) in the UMPCs and OLPCs are not that bad, and consume 2-5 watts -- including graphics and chipset. Only a watt or two of that is the core. AMD also was faster then Intel in the 486 and 586 generations.
Good:
If AMD put 4 of these Geode LX cores in a chip and gave them a shared L2 and graphics oriented SIMD instructions, they could match the Atom & 945gs pair. The low-cost Intel Atom with the 945-series chipset is drawing 14 watts (11+ watts are chipset). We will only know if this is a good chip when we know AMD's full platform power draw. This is the total of the chipset (with IDE, sata, pcix, usb, fan control, etc.)
Better:
Or go back further and use an in-order core like the AMD586. Add a vector unit that has SSE and new graphics instructions (remove the 80-bit floating point unit, trap and emulate). If 8 of these cores were to share a memory controller, L2-cache, and a branch prediction unit, the product would be really flexible.
When the chip is addressed as one full x86 core, the memory controller and branch prediction unit could be designed to use speculative execution to appear to be an super-scalar core (Atom competitor). If the processor hits a branch instruction, it issues the "taken" instruction stream to one CPU and the "not taken" instruction stream to the next CPU.
The branch predictor/L2 cache/memory controller would have to keep track of the writes by each core, and what instruction path the core was on. When the real path of the program is known the branch predictor/L2 cache/memory controller would discard the writes of the core that was down the wrong path, and commit the writes of the core that was on the taken path. With 8 cores you can be working on 8 states, or 3 binary branches out. I have no idea how complicated this is, but speculative execution is not a new idea.
The same chip addressed as 8 cores is a Larrabee competitor. In this mode the L2 acts as a normal shared L2. The memory controller also acts like a normal shared memory controller. The branch predictor may not be used at all, or may just be prefetching the instructions and data down the most likely path for each CPU.
Note:
Work on re-thinking the 486 and 586 cores for mobile devices is already a topic of papers.
http://www.cs.washington.edu/research/smt/memoryLogix.pdf