Intel Atom N470 1.83GHz CPU coming to netbooks early next year
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted Sep 8th 2009 5:57PM
posted Sep 8th 2009 5:57PM
We know how relieved you were when you found out that rumors of Pineview's delay were greatly exaggerated. But have you heard this one? In addition to the N450 1.66GHz system-on-a-chip due to hit the streets in early 2010, Intel is said to be releasing the N470, which will run along at a cool 1.83GHz and sport a 667MHz FSB, hyperthreading support, and a TDP of 6.5 watts (which, considering you won't need a separate graphics controller, is none too shabby). It really makes the whole concept of microprocessor without its own graphics seem a little 2009, doesn't it? Not a bad deal all around -- provided this thing comes in at a decent price point it's sure to put a smile on the face of netbook manufacturers and consumers alike. But NVIDIA? Not so much.
[Via liliputing]
[Via liliputing]
Considering how crappy the graphics have been on Intel motherboards for the Atom, this isn't all that good of a thing, and I hope manufacturers stick with the Ion.
If it doesn't run Crysis, then it's crap? We're talking netbooks here. The most these computers need in terms of graphics is 720p decoding, for which this hardware is perfect.
So... and what about a 32nm Atom with like 2GHz and DDR3 800 support without a built in GMA 500 GPU so we can pair it with the new nVIDIA ION LE Intel??? Please..?
But guess this one sounds perfect if i want to work with MS Office, browse the internet, take notes or watch normal definition videos with a great battery life since it obliterates the N270/N280 by a few Watts.
Tho is this the total consumption of the 2 chips? Or just the CPU+GPU one?
Intel has never been able to make good onboard graphics processors. Never.
as long as it isnt via, im happy. i early adopted to the hp 2133. i cant even watch youtube without chop
So will or won't this thing play 720p & 1080p h.264?
Netbooks in stores now can't even play Hulu at normal resolution. If the Zune HD can do things a netbook can't, Intel's got a big PR problem.
Yeah, all a person needs to do is load up a site with HD video and the CPU will crash and burn.
i love you Engrudget
i love you Engrudget
i love you Engrudget
i love you Engrudget
Based on the benchmarks of the ASRock Ion board, even a dual core Atom overclocked to 2.0GHz couldn't run HD Flash video smoothly. So its unlikely this will, unless (a) its a new core, which I don't think it is, or (b) Adobe finally gets around to support GPU offloads.
@Scarhawk
Dude, the Atom is completely pathetic and 1.8Ghz means nothing when comparing it to Pentium standards... Of course this is reasonable because it consumes a very low amount of power.. Expect 1080 in the next Intel Atom (or hopefully AMD Atom)
It'll finally be nice to do away with the i945 series chipset with its power-sapping design and outdated performance and peripherals.
Honestly, that's the thing with a fan on it on your average microATX atom board. Not the Atom CPU itself. Expect to see computers dip under 30 watts with this new platform.
I was planning on getting a Thinkpad, but if these perform significantly better than the current N270s then I might just get another netbook. The battery life on these things is going to be far better than on current netbooks, and video performance should be quite a bit better as well.
Is having a dual core processor in a netbook too much to ask?
Yes. You want CULV.
Kills battery life.
Seriously. Single core? What God damn year is it?
Is really good power consumption levels packaged with a decent ION platform and 720 p graphics not enough for you? Buy a LAPTOP, you do know what they are right? Be thankful CULV can deliver us good approx. 5.5 watt power consumption in a dual core platform. If people keep hungering for more, than what is the point of the ATOM platform?
The point is they have had a dual core atom for a year now and it has not been used in a single netbook.
One of the requirements to qualify for Microsoft's Windows XP ULCPC program, as well as Windows 7 Starter Edition, is that the processor can not have more than one core.
Okay, it seems like its time to say this:
If the only comment you can come up with about any Atom or Netbook story is "Why isn't this a dual core?" then you sir, are an idiot.
Intel's dual core Atom chip is designed for Desktops. It doesn't have either the power consumption or the thermal envelope to allow it to be used in a netbook.
In case you still haven't gotten it--you will NEVER see an N330 based netbook. Not next quarter. NEVER.
Get over it. Buy a "thin and light" laptop already with a CULV processor. That's what you actually want.
@Fanfoot hi mate. sorry to be the bearer of ill news, but the 330 is being used in some netbooks (not that i'd buy one) - just sayin...
http://www.hardwaresphere.com/2009/10/17/haleron-swordfish-net102-dual-core-atom-netbook/
Wow! I'm excited - a horribly underpowered CPU by modern standards on a woefully inadequately sized unit.
Amazing!
Please let this netbook craze die.
I'm gonna go ahead and say that this'll match what a lot of people need just fine. When you really only use a computer for internet and basic streaming video, you don't exactly need the newest, hottest tech.
You do, however, need something that isn't sized for Mini Me.
Eh, I'm 6'4 and have pretty big hands and my 10" Eee PC works fine for my uses(engadget reading, flash video watching, and, until recently, android development). When I need something more I use my desktop computer with its 42" HDTV monitor(yes, I realize that's a ridiculous change in screen size)
I too am 6'4" and have big hands and find netbooks too small.
And my name is also Mark. Obviously I'm you in an alternative reality.
I for one hope the netbook market continues to evolve and expand.
My primary laptop has become the EEE PC 1000he. Love it. Would only trade for a netbook with ion.
Honestly, netbooks are forcing manufacturers to have rock bottom prices while still trying to pump out the newest advances. I don't see how this could be bad.
Which netbooks have you actually used? Have you tried the more recent 10" models with "edge-to-edge" keyboards?
So many great flow charts! My flow chart folder is getting too large and I'm going to have a hard time hiding it from my significant other.
If it doesn't play HD videos, it won't put a smile on my face. Unless netbooks are cheapter than $99.
You have a $99 laptop that plays HD videos?
Well, lets home Intel fix their GMA500 drivers a little so we can at least do 720p on that thing. Maybe...
GMA500 does HD decently, and better than the GMA950. I hear rumors, are that the Pintrail atom may get a GMA600 with improved HD support.
I heard Intel saying Netbooks aren't supposed to play back 1080p no matter what CPU you install into them. And I'm eager to see less power savings and two cores instead. I don't need a graphics core in it, just make sure I can connect 9400M to it.
And no, I don't have $99 netbook that plays HD video. Because if I had, I wouldn't care about new netbooks.
Lets be clear here. Many netbooks can play HD video just fine. If what you mean by HD video is AVI or MPEG or Quicktime or whatever.
However, if what you mean is HD FLASH, then no current netbooks play this at all well, and it isn't likely this will do it either. And no, it doesn't matter if it has an Ion or not since flash doesn't do GPU offloading in any significant way.
Does this mean netbook's finally be able to run Youtube HD? / HD content on video sharing sites in general?
No, it means no Ion support = no youtube HD support, no fast video converting, no 1080p ect. "Its not made for high-res videos and 3D games" or that is what Intel thinks.
And again, the assumption that Ion will improve HD Flash support. Which it won't.
Go read the article about the ASRock Ion mobo with the dual core Atom that Anand OC'd to 2.0GHz and still couldn't get HD Flash to work well. Then come back and comment if you like.
@Fanfoot : Not yet at least... though Adobe has promised GPU acceleration for flash videos by the first half of next year.
@Shinigami. Under Windows you're correct. Under Linux it will play HD Flash fine, apparently.
Good call Fanfoot, Flash doesn't support hardware acceleration so even if you pair a GTX295 with a N270 your Flash HD experience will still suck.
Oh. Wow. Processors. So interesting.
Let's review, shall we?
Atom N280 (Circa February 2009)
TDP: 2.5w
Clock: 1.66GHz
FSB: 667MHz
Process: 45nm
Atom N470 (Circa 2008)
TDP: 6.5w
Clock: 1.86GHz
FSB: 667MHz
Process: 45nm
In effect, all we're getting here is a slight boost in clockspeed and the GPU/memory controller moved on-die. Performance isn't likely to be significantly different on the CPU front, and the GPU is now locked-in, removing the possibility of using a higher-end chipset-based solution such as nVidia's ION.
As far as I can tell, ION (the whole deal, chipset/GPU) requires 12w, Intel's existing Atom chipsets consume 25.5w. Assuming Tiger Point consumes as much power as the ICH7 (3.3w), here's how it stacks up:
Intel N280 + nVidia ION (GeForce 9400M): 14.5W
Intel N470 + Tiger Point: 9.5W
Sure, it's an improvement in power consumption (dramatically compared to Intel's old platform), but unless they've got an exceptional GPU on-die, you're looking at much lower graphical performance. Me, I'd rather have something using the ION platform rather than the N470.
After all, with the ION, you're getting decent GPU performance fast enough for random 3D apps and low-end gaming, CUDA for acceleration or video decoding, etc. It makes the Atom platform bearable when combined with something like CoreAVC.
I've got to wonder if moving the GPU on-die was more about locking out nVidia as it was about actually saving any power (couldn't the GPU be integrated into Tiger Point?) It's hardly something to get excited about when it'll be released some time in 2010 and we've got a better solution on the market *right now*.
Come on, Intel, the only significant improvement to the Atom platform in almost two years came from nVidia! You need to step up your game!
Of course, I meant 2010 for the N470.
nVidia has the licence to build chipsets for the DMI interface. They could always build an Ion chipset, with some sort of ATI Hybrid Graphics-like system to save power.
As long as this has proper DXVA/VA-API and OpenCL support, CUDA just seems overkill.
I have to agree, this really sounds like a way to force nVIDIA to stay out of this game, especially since this thing is still using 45nm.
And everyone should also understand that the GPU built in the N470 is actually even less capable than the old GMA950 included in all those N270\N280 setups. So i wonder if this thing is actually even capable to fulfill Windows 7 needs for everyone that is planing on use that OS.
Hopefully with the new ION LE things should start to go better for nVIDIA if companies still pair it with the Atom N280.
An advantage of the N470 + chipset I can see is the tiny size of it. I'm not sure actually how big the ION chipset is, but I'd assume it isn't smaller than the old Atom chipset was, while the new Tigerpoint chipset is like about a third of the original Atom chipset in physical size (see http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11548&Itemid=1).
So Tigerpoint netbooks could either be much slimmer again or they have more space to include a larger battery or other hardware.
@Lionheart
You can't combine cell phone with 6-cell laptop battery, so size doesn't really matter.
Looks like a 15-20% graphics increase according to Fudzilla along with PASSIVE COOLING, which is a massive plus- much quieter, slimmer, cooler, less energy both from the chip and from not using fans, and about 1/3 of the current size.
All in all a fairly good upgrade from the Atom, yet still being the crap that it is.