2011 is going to be a big year for x86 processors. It is the year that will see the release of new processor architectures by both Intel and AMD. At a deeper level, these architectures are very different, but the goal of each processor is the same. Both Intel and AMD wanted to improve the performance of their processors in video and games, tasks which can still give modern processors a workout.
For Intel and AMD, this is great. Providing better multimedia performance will make computers feel a lot faster and will keep people entertained. If you’re Nvidia, however, this is very bad news – and new information about the performance of Zacate, one AMD’s new mobile platforms, makes the situation look even more dire than before.
Code names can be a bit confusing, so let me try and clear the waters for you. AMD will soon be releasing a platform called Brazos that is built for netbooks and ultraportables. This platform will be equipped with one of two processors. The one we’ve heard about most often is Ontario, AMD’s Atom-killer. But another important piece of hardware is Zacate, a mid-range processor that is meant to compete with Intel’s low-voltage processors.
Zacate and Ontario are similar, but Zacate is the faster part. A great deal of the performance advantage relevant to Ontario is courtesy of the graphics integrated into the processor. Ontario has a GPU with 80 stream processing units that is clocked at 280 MHz. Zacate has the same number of stream processing units, but the GPU is clocked at 500 MHz.
There is still an embargo on the raw data behind Zacate, but there isn’t an embargo on more general information about Zacate’s performance. According to sites that I trust, such as , Zacate’s performance is often times 50% better than what is offered from AMD’s current Nile platform. In my tests of two Nile platform ultraportables I found that the laptops were capable of 3DMark 06 scores around 1400. A 50% increase would put them around 2100. At that point you’re talking about these laptops capable of playing games like World of Warcraft well on low settings, and HD video will be dispatched without any trouble at all. This may not sound impressive, but we’re talking about systems that are targeted at a sub-$500 price bracket.
At that point Ion is extremely irrelevant, regardless of what Nvidia can offer with Optimus. In addition, the Nvidia 310M starts to look question. It is quicker, but it s also consumes more power and more space. The bigger issue, however, is what this indicates about the Bulldozer desktop parts that will arrive later in 2011. If AMD can achieve this level of performance on a part with a TDP of 18 watts, what can it do with a part that can be reasonably expected to have a TDP of up to 95 watts or more?
There has so far been no indication how many stream processors will be in Bulldozer processors, nor do we know the clock speeds. in which a Llano based machine (not Bulldozer, but rather a Phenom II with an APU) was playing an HD video and Lord of the Rings Online simultaneously. I don’t think its unreasonable to imagine full-blown Bulldozer APUs delivering 3DMark 06 scores between 3000 and 5000 as a conservative estimate.
If Intel is also able to deliver similar performance with Sandy Bridge, Nvidia can kiss the low-end market goodbye. There will be no reason to buy inexpensive video cards with new machines because they won’t be an upgrade. We won’t know the exact consequences until Intel and AMD release product – but things are not looking good for the green team.
You must log in to post a comment.