Monday, June 7th 2010

ASUS Readies AMD-based Eee PC 1015T Netbook

ASUS' Eee PC series of netbooks is finally going to get an AMD-based model, the 1015T. This 10.1 inch netbook has a 1024 x 600 pixel screen, and is driven by an AMD V105 single-core processor based on the K8 architecture. The V105 is a 45 nm based processor with 1.20 GHz clock speed, HyperTransport 2 GT/s system interface, 128 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 cache, and a TDP of 9W. The processor is accompanied by RS880 chipset, with integrated ATI Radeon HD 4200 graphics. The 1015T packs 512 MB of memory, 250 or 320 GB HDD with 500 GB of web-based storage, 802.11 b/g/n WiFi, Bluetooth 3.0 (optional), and a battery with up to 6 hours of operation on a full-charge. There is no word on its pricing.

Source: Engadget
Add your own comment

29 Comments on ASUS Readies AMD-based Eee PC 1015T Netbook

#1
brandonwh64
Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!
WOW! i might sale my wife netbook and pick one of these up for light gaming on the go
Posted on Reply
#2
mlee49
So is web based storage a standard in the Netbook world?
Posted on Reply
#3
Fourstaff
10XXT? Hexacore? *drools* *clicky on link* Single core K8? WTF! I feel cheated :mad: *walks away in disgust*
Posted on Reply
#4
orionbg
NO! It is 20 Core!!! :D :D
1015T is the Eee PC model! Not the CPU!
Posted on Reply
#5
soryuuha
Uh oh. I shall keep waiting for Netbook-AMD with cpu-based using K10.5 architecture
Posted on Reply
#6
DaJMasta
Wait, wait wait.... 512MB of memory? Is this 2005?


I was hoping for something like 128MB sideport + at least 1GB in main mem...
Posted on Reply
#7
Tartaros
by: mlee49
So is web based storage a standard in the Netbook world?
Asus has been doing this about 2 years for their notebooks.
Posted on Reply
#8
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: DaJMasta
Wait, wait wait.... 512MB of memory? Is this 2005?


I was hoping for something like 128MB sideport + at least 1GB in main mem...
Came here to say exactly this.

I think my Atom N270 netbook with 2GB of RAM would outperform this thing with only 512MB with Win7 installed.
Posted on Reply
#9
Imsochobo
by: newtekie1
Came here to say exactly this.

I think my Atom N270 netbook with 2GB of RAM would outperform this thing with only 512MB with Win7 installed.
install more ram and this will draw circles around a 1.6 single core atom, about 10 times before the atom is in goal. and maybe fight the duals.
I know a A64 1ghz > atom 1.6 ghz HT easy, add up the 50% performance improvement, the singlecore nature might be a challenge vs dualcore atoms....
Raw compute power i expect the amd to be faster, but when apps have the nature of swallowing what they get(100%)per core usually it is hard to tell.
Posted on Reply
#10
HalfAHertz
It's a real shame they reused the k8 architecture AGAIN and didn't go for k10.5 and more cache...
Posted on Reply
#11
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: Imsochobo
install more ram and this will draw circles around a 1.6 single core atom, about 10 times before the atom is in goal. and maybe fight the duals.
I know a A64 1ghz > atom 1.6 ghz HT easy, add up the 50% performance improvement, the singlecore nature might be a challenge vs dualcore atoms....
Raw compute power i expect the amd to be faster, but when apps have the nature of swallowing what they get(100%)per core usually it is hard to tell.
Oh I know, I'm not arguing that the Atom is a better processor at all, I know the AMD is far better. But as the computers are out of the box, the Atom computer will be faster. I'm more interested in why ASUS has purposely limitted the AMD machine in such a way.
Posted on Reply
#12
n-ster
have you guys forgotten 9W TDP is alot? battery should be crappy on that
Posted on Reply
#13
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: n-ster
have you guys forgotten 9W TDP is alot? battery should be crappy on that
A lot compared to what? A lot compared to Atom's 2.5w? Yes. And when you combine the chipset and processor, the Atom+945GSE is at 8.5w and the AMD+RS880 is at 20w. However, compared to the lowest embedded mobile i3 at 35? No, that 9w or 20w isn't a lot. Battery will be worse than with an Atom, but performance should be better, and the battery life should still be good.

That is probably why ASUS rates Atom machines using the same battery at 7-hours, and rates this laptop at only 6-hours.
Posted on Reply
#14
Imsochobo
by: n-ster
have you guys forgotten 9W TDP is alot? battery should be crappy on that
should i say that a 2.66 ghz 14.1 " 320 gb 7200 rpm 8 gb ram hd3450 posts not much less time as the netbook we have, they bought it for take with you laptop, but its useless, slow, not much greater battery time
And its a EEE!
we all ended up not using it and bringin 12" powerfull laptop, with 4 gigs of ram intel igp with 2.2 ghz dualcore intel.
Way better, alltho bat time isnt as good, but yeah

buy a quality product and you get battery time!

We recently recieved some core I7 laptops with a 5850 (firepro version) laptop with 16 gb ram, 17 " screen tho, but it posts TWO hours 100 load (gpu+cpu) load.
The power adapter for non docking is 200W!!!
Its also dead quiet, kinda impressed me, but its way to big for me...
Posted on Reply
#15
Imsochobo
by: HalfAHertz
It's a real shame they reused the k8 architecture AGAIN and didn't go for k10.5 and more cache...
It is K10....
HyperTransport 2 GT/s system interface

K10 have never had more than 512 kb L2 cache...
Posted on Reply
#16
RejZoR
512MB of RAM !? My rather crappy Acer came with 1GB (and i've upgraded it to 1,5GB).
Posted on Reply
#17
HalfAHertz
by: Imsochobo
It is K10....
HyperTransport 2 GT/s system interface

K10 have never had more than 512 kb L2 cache...
The article seems to disagree:
...and is driven by an AMD V105 single-core processor based on the K8 architecture.
Posted on Reply
#18
NC37
Well its got better graphics. Thats a positive start. As long as its not Intel graphics, theres hope.
Posted on Reply
#19
Baum
hope that it runs flash or will explode!
Posted on Reply
#20
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
about a year ago this would be cool



the 65nm is clocked the same at stock and consumes a couple more watts however undervolted and overclocked i keep the same thermal envelope@1.55ghz also got the X1270 on it with 128mb of dedicated memory (like there is a samsung chip on the mobo dedicated ;))
Posted on Reply
#21
n-ster
the intel offering, CPU wise and battery wise, is much better. meaning the cheap dual core centrinos or whatever. So for the majority of the people, an intel will be better
Posted on Reply
#22
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: n-ster
the intel offering, CPU wise and battery wise, is much better. meaning the cheap dual core centrinos or whatever. So for the majority of the people, an intel will be better
There isn't a cheap Centrino that comes close to 9w TPD though, which is why they don't use them in netbooks.

Edit: I should clearify that I'm talking about processors that would fit in the same price range for netbooks. There are some ULV Core 2 Solo and Duo processors in the 5-10w range, but they are also priced at $275-300 per processor, which is almost the price of an entire netbook retail.
Posted on Reply
#23
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: n-ster
the intel offering, CPU wise and battery wise, is much better. meaning the cheap dual core centrinos or whatever. So for the majority of the people, an intel will be better
actually intel has a chip that fits the built but its a single core and draws more wattage (1W lol) its called the SU2700 it has been used in very few notebooks and the ones it was used in were very expensive one such was a sony vaio M

http://ark.intel.com/product.aspx?id=42004

much like the AMD ULV chips this CPU smokes the N450 and N270

http://www.techpinas.com/2010/03/intel-su2700-vs-intel-atom-n450-n270.html


by: newtekie1
There isn't a cheap Centrino that comes close to 9w TPD though, which is why they don't use them in netbooks.
oh you mean there is a reason that intel puts the atom the low power low cost chip in netbooks?
Posted on Reply
#24
n-ster
The SU2300 came with some acer netbook IIRC, at around 400~450$ MAX

but my point is that the better gpu won't help much, since the main target for netbook sells is the mass. Therefore a better CPU is going to be seen as a better netbook

Now this netbook has a very low amount of RAM, and not so great battery life... To make it better, you'd have to buy a 2gb stick, which will boost the price of this netbook by at least 50$ if not more, which is fine, except the mass don't bother with such things
Posted on Reply
#25
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: n-ster
The SU2300 came with some acer netbook IIRC, at around 400~450$ MAX

but my point is that the better gpu won't help much, since the main target for netbook sells is the mass. Therefore a better CPU is going to be seen as a better netbook

Now this netbook has a very low amount of RAM, and not so great battery life... To make it better, you'd have to buy a 2gb stick, which will boost the price of this netbook by at least 50$ if not more, which is fine, except the mass don't bother with such things
6hrs isn't bad battery life and they can get alot more but i have yet to see an AMD netbook were the manuf has enabled cool and quiet...my gateway can get 4-5hrs maxed out running autodesk inventor (try that on an atom) but with my own personal power saver setting i can get 6-8hrs very easily the chips tune very well and at 800mhz its still enough power to run office, internet and music with no lags.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment