Ars: Intel's low-cost "Diamondville" CPU

[dougz]

...Intel is planning an ultra-low-power, low-cost 45nm processor codenamed "Diamondville." Intel has now revealed a bit more about the goals and technology behind the processor that will power a new wave of shiny objects in 2008....

Diamondville processors will be soldered directly on to the motherboard, eliminating the cost of the socket and bringing the total price of the computer down into the sub-$300 range.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20 ... egory.html

Cited article also links to an IDG interview with Intel's Anand Chandrasekher which says that "Diamondville is a Silverthorne derivative." http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,14021 ... ticle.html

[jamesavery22]

Very nice. 1/2 watt for chipsets. Wonder how Silverthorne will be in terms of performance. Also a little surprised that Intel is focusing on UMPC's so much. Such a niche market. My conspiracy theory gears spin and make me think that maybe Intel makes these "UMPC friendly" platforms and CPUs because its easy for them. As in all the R&D they put into their main cash cows make it extremely easy to make a stripped down version and label it differently. Its guaranteed Intel's next mobile chips will be better and less power-hungry, question is by how much?

IMHO the best take away from this kind of news is that Intel is keeping to their word and working hard at meeting those reduced power goals they set awhile back.

[dougz]

it turns out that the Diamondville/Silverthorne processor that will power these devices is a lot leaner than I thought. And contrary to expectations, it also will lag Core Solo significantly in clock-for-clock performance.

13.1 A Sub-1W to 2W Low-Power IA Processor for Mobile Internet Devices and Ultra-Mobile PCs in 45nm High-К Metal-Gate CMOS...

A 47M transistor, 25mm2, sub-2W IA processor designed for mobile internet devices is presented. It features a 2-issue, in-order pipeline with 32KB iL1 and 24KB dL1 caches, integer and floating point execution units, x86 front end, a 512KB L2 cache and a 533MT/s front-side bus. The design is manufactured in 9M 45nm High-К metal-gate CMOS and housed in a 441-ball μFCBGA package.

Obviously, Silverthorne won't be anywhere near even a first-generation Pentium M in terms of clock-for-clock performance, though a (more appropriate) performance/watt comparison may put it within striking distance of even a Core Solo. Nonetheless, don't expect Windows to be anything but slow on Silverthorne—you're going want to run a mobile Linux flavor on a Silverthorne-based MID.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20 ... ssors.html

[jamesavery22]

These are aimed at devices that are between a pocketpc and a laptop in terms of performance, correct? So not being able to run Windows is sort of a given

[dougz]

These are aimed at devices that are between a pocketpc and a laptop in terms of performance, correct? So not being able to run Windows is sort of a given

I guess that all depends on definitions. What is the difference between a pocket pc, a MID, and a 7" screen notebook like the Asus Eee and Everex?

The very popular Asus Eee 7" screen subnotebook (900 MHz Celeron/512 MB) comes with Xandros Linux and claims to be Windows XP compatible. "EeePC Getting Windows XP Version in December" -- http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/rumor/eeepc- ... 321174.php

The forthcoming Everex Cloudbook 7" screen subnotebook (1.2 GHz Via C7 ULV/512 MB) will compete with the Eee. Even less CPU horsepower than the Eee, but a 30 GB HD instead of 4/8 GB Flash. Comes with the same gOS (Ubuntu Linux & Enlightenment WM) as used in the Everex/Wal-Mart $199 PC. http://www.mobilemag.com/content/100/333/C14037/

SPCR poster says Everex desktop machine has decent performance. viewtopic.php?p=379015#379015

Clearly, Vista won't fit on these little machines, XP is pushing it, and a lighter Win like Win 2K would be better. The Windows-based UMPCs have really been duds due to slow performance and poor battery life. The Asus and Everex Linux-based subnotebooks have chosen a lighter weight OS better suited to the performance of these little energy-efficient processors.

No getting around it -- Linux scales better than Windows. That doesn't matter too much if you can throw lots of cycles at a desktop or laptop. It does matter when you are trying to be energy-efficient and don't have the cycles to waste.

[jamesavery22]

Very true. Once you get to UMPC and below there really isn't any real standards or form factors for obvious reasons.
Is this the processor that was going to be used in that bigger version of an iPhone? Can't even remember who that was, Intel? MS?

[dougz]

Another issue affecting the Linux/Windows design decision is security.

Personally, I can't imagine running Windows without AntiVirus & AntiSpyware; particularly important on a mobile x86 Win device working on "strange" networks. I don't need equivalent software for Linux.

Linux firewalls also tend to be less resource consumptive than Windows firewalls because they have far fewer GUI features.

So, when you consider the working set size & CPU efficiency of XP/Vista, along with the need for "expensive" security software CPU cycles, the comment in the Ars article makes a lot of sense. These energy-efficient little CPUs are probably not a good match for Windows. They are better matched to a lean Linux with a lightweight WM.