Friday, September 3rd 2010

AMD's Fusion ''Ontario'' APU Chip Pictured

At the ongoing IFA event in Berlin, AMD displayed one of the first derivatives of its Bobcat low-power x86 processor architecture, codenamed "Ontario". This Fusion APU (accelerated processing unit), which is a combination of an x86 CPU and a DirectX 11 compliant GPU is built for low-power devices such as netbooks, handhelds, and tablets. AMD also showed off the chip package itself, which is roughly the size of a 1 Euro coin. The package, like AMD's mobile Athlon/Phenom processors, has no integrated heatspreader (IHS), but like the Intel Atom, uses a ball-grid array (BGA) to permanently fix itself to the system board.

AMD claims that the chip offers "mainstream performance" at less than half the die area (in this case, below 100 mm²), and a fraction of the power. Speaking of which, the "Ontario" Fusion APU has a TDP of 9W, while a higher-performance APU codenamed "Zacate", which is probably competitive with Intel's CULV processors, and is built for ultra-thin notebooks, nettops and slim all-in-one PCs, has a TDP of 18W. AMD claims that the two will ship (to OEMs, because these are not end-user products) in Q4 2010. For the desktop, AMD is developing the "Llano" Fusion APUs that are of a different form-factor and package altogether.

Source: Computerbase.de
Add your own comment

38 Comments on AMD's Fusion ''Ontario'' APU Chip Pictured

#1
MrAlex
8W TDP? Very nice! I expect to see a 1W TDP in the future AMD ;)
Posted on Reply
#2
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
I hope this gives Atom a nice kick in the ass.
Posted on Reply
#3
Sasqui
Very cool. Wonder if/how they will be able to scale with these in parallel.

OT: "Ontario"? Why not name the other chip "Erie" or "Quebec"? :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#4
INSTG8R
by: Sasqui
Very cool. Wonder if/how they will be able to scale with these in parallel.

OT: "Ontario"? Why not name the other chip "Erie" or "Quebec"? :laugh:
What I was thinking and why are they shown next to a Loonie or a Toonie :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#5
HalfAHertz
OMG it's so tiny! Any guesses on the GPU power? Must be in the ballpark of a hd4200 with that miniscule size.
Posted on Reply
#6
Frogger
by: Sasqui
Very cool. Wonder if/how they will be able to scale with these in parallel.

OT: "Ontario"? Why not name the other chip "Erie" or "Quebec"? :laugh:
It's either a small tribute or a b## slap ...... with the lost of the ATI banner ther might be a few staff here with ???? about the future... how many who knows? From the # of locations {att pic} that # could be large:eek:
Posted on Reply
#7
a_ump
Never know, redwood is quite small but packs 400SPU's, maybe this'll manage like 240-320 or something. That wouldn't be bad at all, and hella efficient, esp compared to Ion.

I compare it to ion since ion is the only netbook config that has acceptable performance. But it's not gonna surprise me one bit if this new "ontario" by AMD sets the bar a decent bit higher.
Posted on Reply
#8
suraswami
nice.

is this a single or dual-core chip?
Posted on Reply
#10
Sasqui
by: Frogger
It's either a small tribute or a b## slap ...... with the lost of the ATI banner ther might be a few staff here with ???? about the future... how many who knows? From the # of locations {att pic} that # could be large:eek:
I totaly forgot ATI was from Canada! At least originally... :wtf:
Posted on Reply
#11
Static~Charge
by: suraswami
is this a single or dual-core chip?
The Ontario is a dual-core chip:

AMD itself recently confirmed that Ontario -- which features two x86 cores based on Bobcat micro-architecture, integrated DirectX 11-class graphics core and DDR3 memory controller -- is actually a single-chip system-on-chip (SoC) device.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20100420225440_AMD_Ontario_Monolithic_System_on_Chip_40nm_Fabrication_Process.html

Preliminary performance numbers look good compared to the Atom D510.
Posted on Reply
#12
suraswami
by: Static~Charge
The Ontario is a dual-core chip:

AMD itself recently confirmed that Ontario -- which features two x86 cores based on Bobcat micro-architecture, integrated DirectX 11-class graphics core and DDR3 memory controller -- is actually a single-chip system-on-chip (SoC) device.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20100420225440_AMD_Ontario_Monolithic_System_on_Chip_40nm_Fabrication_Process.html

Preliminary performance numbers look good compared to the Atom D510.
Seems perfect for a low power sucking server :rockout:
Posted on Reply
#13
mastrdrver
I about shat myself when I noticed the die size between the two in relation to the transistor count and process node.

die shot comparison of Bobcat vs Atom

More information in the thread

Best part of the Hardware-Info article:
......The TDP of the "Zacate" module is specified by AMD as 18 Watts, and the used aluminum heatspreader (ca. 4 x 4 x 2 cm + fan) dif not even get hand-warm, after several minutes of 3-D applications and video-acceleration.....................We could bring AMD to make a statement about the performance: the Zacate APU should be appreciably faster than an Intel Core-based Pentium dual core.......
Posted on Reply
#14
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
I'm very interested to see how much GPU power this packs... 80sp's worth in ATi terms is barely viable for gaming, 320 odd or more and were really talking.

the Mobility Radeon HD 5430 which as 80sp's @ 550MHz is rated around 7 watt... so really I'm not sure whether they will be able to pull a rabbit out of the hat on this one. having said that I believe 7w does include it's onboard memory .
Posted on Reply
#15
Mussels
Moderprator
by: wolf
I'm very interested to see how much GPU power this packs... 80sp's worth in ATi terms is barely viable for gaming, 320 odd or more and were really talking.

the Mobility Radeon HD 5430 which as 80sp's @ 550MHz is rated around 7 watt... so really I'm not sure whether they will be able to pull a rabbit out of the hat on this one. having said that I believe 7w does include it's onboard memory .
even if its no good for gaming, you're still gunna get hardware accelerated H264, bluray, and flash playback - at levels far above what intels best can offer.
Posted on Reply
#16
mastrdrver
by: wolf
I'm very interested to see how much GPU power this packs... 80sp's worth in ATi terms is barely viable for gaming, 320 odd or more and were really talking.

the Mobility Radeon HD 5430 which as 80sp's @ 550MHz is rated around 7 watt... so really I'm not sure whether they will be able to pull a rabbit out of the hat on this one. having said that I believe 7w does include it's onboard memory .
320 SP!? This is Bobcat not Llano.

This is for netbook/ultra portable and some very entry level desktop. Basically where ever Atom is at Bobcat is going to be AMD's offer.

This is like taking a dual core Wolfdale with a 5350 and putting it in a netbook and only having 18W for both parts max. It has the possibility of being so bad that it is rumored that Intel is getting a Sandy Bridge variant ready just in case. That alone should give a clear sign of what Intel thinks of not only Bobcat but also Atom. Problem with that is the SB part will be expensive, Bobcat shouldn't.
Posted on Reply
#17
a_ump
by: mastrdrver
I about shat myself when I noticed the die size between the two in relation to the transistor count and process node.

die shot comparison of Bobcat vs Atom

More information in the thread

Best part of the Hardware-Info article:
wow, did you see how small ontario's bobcat cpu's are compared intel's atoms? dam its gonna rock, imagine if they had just those and no GPU, much smaller die. That'd make a great netbook cpu imo for the cheaper ones.
Posted on Reply
#18
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
by: Mussels
even if its no good for gaming, you're still gunna get hardware accelerated H264, bluray, and flash playback - at levels far above what intels best can offer.
let's hope that Intel stops resting on its laurels in terms of Atom and gets back into gear, IMO Atom has not made much progress since the first netbooks.
Posted on Reply
#19
Tartaros
by: Mussels
even if its no good for gaming, you're still gunna get hardware accelerated H264, bluray, and flash playback - at levels far above what intels best can offer.
Even if we quit the high end 3d games, there are casual and light games that will get a nice upgrade, for example torchlight.

At the screen resolution the netbooks usually have, this gpu fairly good.
Posted on Reply
#21
Techtu
by: MrAlex
8W TDP? Very nice! I expect to see a 1W TDP in the future AMD ;)
I agree... there is no competition against Intel in this market!! or IF there is I'm struggling to hear of who?
Posted on Reply
#22
Mussels
Moderprator
by: Tech2
I agree... there is no competition against Intel in this market!! or IF there is I'm struggling to hear of who?
Via is a player in the ITX/compact market, but they dont have enough to go around, so they're not in many products.
Posted on Reply
#23
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
Very very cool and I Would love to see some of them smart phones get some of these APUs in them. Give the Snapdragon a run for its money.
Posted on Reply
#24
AsphyxiA
by: WarEagleAU
Very very cool and I Would love to see some of them smart phones get some of these APUs in them. Give the Snapdragon a run for its money.
exactly what I was thinking. More for the AMD (cough::ATI::cough) GPU built in.
Posted on Reply
#25
Imsochobo
by: wolf
I'm very interested to see how much GPU power this packs... 80sp's worth in ATi terms is barely viable for gaming, 320 odd or more and were really talking.

the Mobility Radeon HD 5430 which as 80sp's @ 550MHz is rated around 7 watt... so really I'm not sure whether they will be able to pull a rabbit out of the hat on this one. having said that I believe 7w does include it's onboard memory .
Okey.
I think they said 32 nm for fusion, but i may be right, that would be the answer you would look for.

But more complex stuff. explaining benefits of fusion.

Okey, Leets do this example:
1
you got 1 volt.
over a 0,5mm^2 cable, over 3 meeters for instance, its not 1 v, current is lost because of the resistance in the cable.
you would maybe have 0,8volt and wudnt be suffecient to drive the chip.
So you gotta juice on 1 watt more, 1 watt here one watt there.
2. you got only one power circuit.
How much does theese thing use? well, quite alot of power, they do need cooling, the things next to your cpu, on low end they do not require this. meaning, a few watts shaved off there.
sharing memory controller for vga and cpu ?(uncertant) a few watts there too.

Stack up all the benefits here, and you'll see serious power figures(performance) and power consumtion go down.
Go back in history, amd going with IMC(interigated memory controller) then intel did, then intel just placed a IGP next to the cpu, and look what that did!

Big benefits, this is explained very.. non detailed whatso ever, but both intel and amd know, more in one chip benefits everyone, gpu's are too power hungry to be built in(for us.)
but a gpu doing opencl would be good!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment