Does Intel's Dual-Core Atom Improve Efficiency? : Atom 330: Dual-Core To The Rescue?

Atom 330: Dual-Core To The Rescue?

Intel’s low-power Atom processors have received an interesting upgrade, as a more attractive dual-core version has now been available for a few months. You may recall our shootout between an entry-level Core 2 system and a standard Atom 230 solution: Core 2 Nukes Atom on the Desktop. The Atom turned out to be truly low on power consumption, yet it lost to the Core 2 business machine when it came to power efficiency defined as performance per watt. Well, it’s time to look at the new dual-core Atom 330, which, in fact, could make a difference for low cost PCs.

There's Two Of Them...

Once again, Intel followed the approach that seems the most economical: it attached two Atom single-core CPUs onto a Socket 441 chip to create a dual-core Atom processor. This was the same method used with the Pentium D 900 series (65 nm Presler) and with the Core 2 Quad family (65 nm Kentsfield and 45 nm Yorkfield). It would certainly be possible to create a monolithic dual-core by creating a die that contains two chips, but this would also introduce the risk of lower product yields (e.g. the 90 nm Pentium D800 Smithfield). With the dual-core packaging system, Intel can select and validate chips to be used in single or dual configurations. The third approach—a unified dual-core processor—would require a lot of development, which isn’t appropriate for a cost effective product.

The Future Atom

The Atom processor has been available since the second quarter of 2008, and it will still be around until the end of this year, when it will be replaced by a more integrated solution called Pineview. This upcoming product cycle will integrate the processor with the chipset northbridge, resulting in a two-chip solution that is referred to as the Pine Trail-D platform. This means that both the graphics unit as well as the memory controller will be part of the next-generation Atom, starting in dual-core flavors, with single-core models following. Intel aims to reduce the total package size by 70% and the total thermal design power (TDP) by 50%.

Atom Now

Let’s start with a little summary of Atom processor and platform options, and quickly move on to our benchmark results. Since the Atom 230 and 330 will be around for almost one more year, the question of whether or not it makes sense to get a dual-core system is highly relevant for low budget PCs and undemanding applications. Can the Atom 330 dual-core claim the efficiency crown from entry-level Core 2 systems?

NVIDIA PhysX - CUDA Power in Gaming (GeForce GTX 280)

Physics at Lightspeed

If you are well into your teens, chances are you would have a smattering of knowledge in physics. You might also know that Earth, though as wondrously complex as it, is actually strictly governed by certain laws of physics. So encompassing are these laws that it is even possible to predict to a great degree of accuracy, the height of waves at your nearby beach, 10 years from now.

While that might be possible, it is certainly not easy. Remember that in physics, formulae are king. That's right, we are talking about things like F = MA, E = MC2, and these are only the simple ones. There are also more infinitely complex ones, involving differential, trigonometry, summation and integration.

By now, you might be wondering what does all of this got to do with games and, more importantly, graphics cards? Well, like the world we live in, game worlds are governed by their own laws of physics which are getting more complex to portray realism. While they are not as complex as the real word, they are still complicated enough to bog down your traditional CPU. This is where the CPU needs help from the GPU to keep the game running smooth and realistic, hence enter PhysX.

As a brief introduction, PhysX is a middleware physics engine which enables real-time physics in games. By middleware, what it means is that game developers need not write their own physics code, only that they need to license the engine for use, thus saving time and effort. But what really makes PhysX stand out from its competitors is that it is primed to take advantage of the parallel processing power of graphics processors through CUDA. Doing this takes the strain of calculating complex physics equations and algorithms off the CPU, resulting in smoother game play, leading to a better gaming experience.

Right now all GeForce 8 and above graphics cards offer support for PhysX right out of the box, so long as you've downloaded and installed the latest drivers. A couple of years ago however, this wasn't the case. Let's step back a little to see how PhysX has progressed to its current stage and what its potential is from our testing.


By Kenny Yeo
http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?cid=3&id=2802&pg=1

Microsoft Says "Sorry" About Windows 7 UAC, Vows to Appease Critics

DailyTech recently reported on how a critical security flaw found in the beta of Microsoft's upcoming Windows 7 OS could allow attackers to easily disable the integral User Account Control (UAC) security component and gain control of systems. The flaw was first discovered by Windows blogger Long Zheng, and was also independently detailed by blogger Rafael Rivera. The pair followed up with additional information yesterday on how the flaw could be used to give a malicious payload full execution rights.

Microsoft's reaction to the flaw initially was to totally deny that it was a problem, choosing to instead refer to it as "by design". In a blog post, Jon DeVaan, the senior vice president responsible for Windows' architecture and core components defended the move saying it was necessary to prevent user annoyance.

Stated Mr. DeVaan, "If people see more than two prompts in a session they feel that the prompts are irritating and interfering with their use of the computer. We are very happy with the positive feedback we have received about UAC."

His blog post was met with a firestorm of criticism from experienced Windows users in the community. However, rather than casting a blind eye to the criticism, Microsoft has apparently listened to its community and customers, today announcing a swift and dramatic reversal on its UAC stance.

Microsoft announced that it will implement the seemingly obvious solution to the problem. It will warn users before any changes to the UAC. Previously this was only done in safe mode. The change preserves Microsoft's certification system, which provides less irritating warnings, while now safeguarding the UAC.

Jon DeVaan and Steven Sinofsky, two Microsoft executives responsible for Windows' development, released a joint statement today. The pair writes, "Our dialog is at that point where many do not feel listened to and also many feel various viewpoints are not well-informed. That's not the dialog we set out to have and we're going to do our best to improve."

They attempt to placate critics, stating, "We said we thought we were bound to make a mistake in the process of designing and blogging about Windows 7. We want to continue the dialog and hopefully everyone recognizes that engineering, perhaps especially engineering Windows 7, is sometimes going to be a lively discussion with a broad spectrum of viewpoints."

Most importantly, they reveal, "We are going to deliver two changes to the Release Candidate that we'll all see. First, the UAC control panel will run in a high integrity process, which requires elevation. Second, changing the level of the UAC will also prompt for confirmation."

The upcoming Release Candidate of Windows 7, which features these changes, will mark almost the last step before Windows 7 goes on sale. The pair’s remarks may be significant as they seem to indicate that the RC will be coming soon, which would be a sign that Windows 7 is well on-track for its target launch of the second half of 2009.

The move by Microsoft to accept and deal with the criticism constructively is already being praised by some in the security community, even if they feel it was more to avoid negative PR than to strengthen security. Says Andrew Storms, director of security operations at nCircle Network Security Inc. in an interview with ComputerWorld, "This goes back to what beta programs are supposed to provide: feedback from a real audience. This was an obvious design flaw, and for them to say they simply weren't going to fix it, that was the real problem. I think they realized that they needed to do something, more over the concern about their reaction than to the vulnerability itself."

And Mr. Long, who discovered the flaw, reveals pleasant surprise at the response, stating, "This is definitely the result we've been looking for. [But] I'm a little bit shocked at just how quickly Microsoft has turned around, considering they made a post not 12 hours earlier stating that they would not change their position."



by : Jason Mick (Blog)

AMD Phenom II X4 940 & 920: A True Return to Competition

Author: Anand Lal Shimpi

The AMD we used to know and love is back. As I write this sentence, most of AMD is still on vacation. By the time you read this, that will have changed, but it's such a stark contrast to what happened when the original Phenom processor launched. In the months leading up to Phenom, AMD treated it like it would be its hero. "Just wait", we were told. So we did. And Phenom was the biggest disappointment AMD had ever left us with.

AMD re-launched Phenom the following year, in 2008, with slightly better reception. The CPU evolved from something unsellable to an honest alternative to Intel's CPUs, just not one we'd recommend. Phenom ran too hot, didn't offer better performance, and offered some strange behavior with Cool'n'Quiet enabled.

While AMD was very excited about the first Phenom, we heard relatively little about Phenom II. The first time we heard the name was at AMD's Financial Analyst Day a couple of months ago, and then a month later we had a chip. AMD invited us to overclock the CPU, but I was busy working on another AMD story at the time and couldn't make it. I was done with flying around for AMD CPU launches; if Phenom II was going to be good, the chip would have to prove itself without an exotic locale or delicious Texas BBQ to sweeten the deal.

And good it is.

AMD is launching two new 45nm Phenom II CPUs today. There's the Phenom II X4 940 at 3.0GHz and the 920 at 2.8GHz. I'll go ahead and say that although it's a little long, I like the name. The II just works. I'm also feeling a bit chipper, so I'll go ahead and give you the conclusion now too.

Here's how it breaks down. The Phenom II X4 940 is usually the same speed or faster than Intel's Core 2 Quad Q9400, and priced similarly at $275. There are some areas where the Q9400 will be faster than the Phenom II X4 940, so if you happen to use an application that runs better on Intel hardware then you've got your choice made out for you. But for the most part, if you're buying a quad-core processor at around $275 today, Phenom II will tempt you.

Similarly, the Phenom II X4 920 is generally better than or equal to Intel's Core 2 Quad Q9300, and priced less (it's more of a competitor to the slower Q8300, but I didn't have one available for testing). The same stipulations detailed above exist here as well; there are some areas where Intel is going to be faster but for the most part our tests showed the Phenom II to be a better option.

Wait, what? An AMD CPU recommendation?

After over two years of us recommending Intel's Core 2 lineup almost exclusively, AMD finally released a real alternative, one that's not just similarly priced, but actually higher performing than the price-competitive Intel part. Over the coming pages I'll explain how.

Now Intel could've spoiled the party, it still has the performance crown and it could easily drive CPU prices even lower. But out of the kindness of its heart, there are no unexpected price cuts, no new product introductions, nothing to spoil AMD's day (yet). While I'll talk about what Intel may do to restore its leadership at these price points, today is all about Phenom II. If you've been waiting for an AMD to be excited about for the past couple of years, today is your day.

Competition is back. Let's get to it.

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550S: A New 65W Quad-Core

Author: Anand Lal Shimpi

In one breath Intel dramatically cut pricing on its Core 2 Quads. Intel’s swift response was even faster than NVIDIA’s after the RV770 launch. In the following breath however, Intel introduced new, lower power, and much higher priced Core 2 Quad CPUs. Enter the S-line.

TDP binning is something that AMD has done for quite a while on the desktop. The e-suffix parts (e.g. Phenom X4 9350e) are lower TDP parts, sold at a premium, to those users who need lower power consumption.

The Phenom X4 9350e and the 9150e are both 65W quad-core parts from AMD, while all of Intel’s quad-core CPUs have been 95W. Unwilling to allow AMD any sort of advantage, Intel has finally responded with 65W quad-core offerings of its own. The difference here is that while AMD’s 65W quad-cores are all significantly lower clocked Phenom processors, Intel’s 65W chips are available at up to 2.83GHz.

The Core 2 Quad Q9550S, Q9400S and Q8200S are all 65W TDP quad-core CPUs. They share the same specs as their non-S brethren. The only difference here is that instead of being 95W TDP parts, these CPUs can fit in a 65W thermal envelope.

Processor	Clock Speed	L2 Cache	L3 Cache	TDP	Price
Intel Core i7-965 Extreme Edition	3.20GHz	1MB	8MB	130W	$999
Intel Core i7-940	2.93GHz	1MB	8MB	130W	$562
Intel Core i7-920	2.66GHz	1MB	8MB	130W	$284
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650	3.00GHz	12MB	-	95W	$316
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550S	2.83GHz	12MB	-	65W	$369
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550	2.83GHz	12MB	-	95W	$266
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400S	2.66GHz	6MB	-	65W	$320
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400	2.66GHz	6MB	-	95W	$213
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300	2.50GHz	4MB	-	95W	$183
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200S	2.33GHz	4MB	-	65W	$245
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200	2.33GHz	4MB	-	95W	$163

The price premium for these new S-parts is huge. The Q9550S costs $103 more than the non-S, the Q9400S will set you back another $107 and the Q8200S is the most affordable with only an $82 premium. Note that in the case of the Q9550S and Q9400S you're actually more expensive than the entry level Core i7-920.

Intel achieves these lower TDPs by running at a lower core voltage. With a mature enough manufacturing process, which Intel’s 45nm process is, it’s quite possible to produce CPUs that run much cooler than average and on a lower voltage. CPU power varies with the square of the voltage, so any savings in voltage can result in a non-linear decrease in power consumption.

Don’t get too excited however. If you remember back to our review of the 9350e/9150e we found that the decrease in power wasn’t worth the added price. Even Intel has come forward and told us that these are primarily OEM parts and not intended for the high volume enthusiast community. With Intel being honest in its intended purpose for these S-class CPUs we don’t really have to do much to keep them honest, we just need to confirm the findings.

To do this we took a subset of our regular CPU performance tests and looked at performance, power consumption and power efficiency. We measured total system power consumption at the wall outlet, which does admittedly lessen the impact of a lower power CPU but it should give us an idea of the real world benefit of these processors. If you want to see how the Q9550/Q9550S performs across our entire suite of benchmarks take a look at AnandTech bench, our new publicly available benchmark database.

...and in case you’re wondering, no, they don’t overclock any better. Our Q9550S couldn’t get any further than the Q9550 we used in our Phenom II review.

Lenovo - ThinkPad X301

Back Lenovo's latest notebook lay in the ThinkPad family, X301. Notebook is claimed as the most thin and light in its class, with a thickness ranging 2.54 cm and weight ranging from below 1.5 kg.

For storage, X301 is available with a choice of solid state drive (SSD) 64 GB or 128 GB. Performance X301 claimed 20% better than the X300, with the DDR3 memory and the processor Intel Core 2 Duo ultra low voltage latest.

This notebook is also equipped with features DisplayPort and VGA, so users can watch content with a few high berdefinisi screen. Other features is a high-speed broadband and WiFi to connect to the Internet and wireless technology Bluetooth3 and Ultra-Wideband3 to connect to another device.

A number of hardware and software tools to maximize productivity are also included, among others, Lenovo Access Connections so that the interface is easy to use and make it easier for users to find and access the Internet and network connection. There is also a Lenovo Power Manager for the resistance of the battery last longer.

ThinkPad X301 is also environmentally friendly because the screen LED backlit 13.3-inch, solid state storage drive technologies and the power saver other. Not surprisingly, this notebook has been obtained rating 'Gold' from the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT).

From information received written detikINET, Wednesday (20/8/2008), ThinkPad X301 is sold with the price of USD 2899. This notebook is available starting August 27 at the Lenovo Business Partners.



posted by : Dewi Widya Ningrum - detikinet

The Best of the Best - High-end Graphics Card Special

Bring Your Biggest Guns!

As 2008 comes to a close, we look back on what can only be described as a very exciting year for graphics cards enthusiasts and gamers, with ATI and NVIDIA slugging it out in what can only be described as a bare-knuckle boxing match.

The first blow came in June, in the form of NVIDIA's latest GeForce GTX 200 cards. These one billion over transistor GPUs were unlike anything we've ever seen before. Its GPU was as large as it was fast, and our initial tests with it revealed that it was substantially faster than anything else on the market today. Once again, the honor of having the fastest graphics card went to NVIDIA. At that point of time, and with these latest additions to the NVIDIA arsenal, we couldn't foresee how ATI could possibly launch a comeback.

But comeback they did, in the guise of their HD Radeon 4800 series of cards. Rather than go head-to-head with NVIDIA in vying for the fastest graphics card mantle, what ATI did instead was to create a fairly powerful yet competitively priced GPU, placing their product squarely in a sweet spot. With that, the launch of the HD Radeon 4800 cards saw NVIDIA taking immediate and drastic actions. Most significantly, in response to the new cards from ATI, NVIDIA abruptly slashed prices off their latest GTX 200 cards by as much as US$150. This smells of sheer desperation if you ask us.

ATI then followed up with a sweet uppercut by releasing the dual-GPU HD 4870 X2, which is essentially two HD 4870 GPUs squeezed onto a single PCB. In a single masterstroke, the new HD 4870 X2 allowed ATI to reclaim the title of the single fastest graphics card from NVIDIA. Something no ATI card has done for sometime.

At that point of time, NVIDIA was suddenly looking rather vulnerable, because not only did they have to deal with the constant onslaught from ATI, they were suffering from problems of a different sort - reliability. Sometime in mid-July, news spread that many of NVIDIA's 8400M and 8600M mobile-GPUs were suffering from some sort of a heat issue, which caused the GPUs to overheat and malfunction. To combat the problem, NVIDIA eventually had to set aside around $200 million dollars to cover costs of repairing and replacing these faulty GPUs.

Eventually, however, they responded to ATI's waves of attack by announcing the improved GeForce GTX 260, aptly dubbed the GeForce GTX 260 Core 216, because of its 216 stream processors - 24 more than the original GTX 260. NVIDIA claims that with the additional stream processors, it will be faster than its direct competitor, ATI's Radeon HD 4870, and our initial impressions with the Leadtek GTX 260 Extreme+ seem to confirm that. More recently, NVIDIA announced the coming of their new dual-GPU GeForce GTX 295 card. The results of our preview suggest that this is now the reigning speed king amongst graphics cards, and is an indication that NVIDIA is slowly but surely getting themselves back on track.

Now, with the year nearing at its end, we take a look back at these high-end GPUs and have, in our selection here, the creme de la creme of cutting-edge graphics cards. Each of these cards represents the best their respective SKU has to offer, and we will be pitting it against each other. So let the battle begin.



posted by: Kenny Yeo
http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?cid=3&id=2610