VIA Preparing Dual-Core Nano 3000 Processor for H2 2009

[btarunr]

VIA, the third active player in the x86 processor market, is known for its low-power processors catering to the ULPC segment of the market. Sources tell HKEPC that the firm is now readying a dual-core variant of its Intel Atom competitor, the Nano 3000. The Nano 3000 series, slated for launches throughout 2009 includes a new architecture by VIA, while bearing the same essential Nano-BGA package.

The processor would use a boarder system interface with the 1333 MHz VIA V4 bus (FSB). It will feature x86-64 extension along with the SSE4 instruction sets to make it standards compliant. It will feature 128KB of L1 and 1MB of L2 caches. VIA is also looking to improve the processor's number-crunching capabilities by working on its integer and floating-point operations efficiency. The processor will be built on the Japanese Fujitsu 65nm manufacturing process which has so far been VIA's foundry partner with processors and S3 Graphics products. The company is also considering a switch to the TSMC 40nm or 45nm node later, sources note. The VIA Nano 3000 Dual-Core variant can be expected in the second-half of 2009, while single core variants of the architecture can be expected earlier.



Source: HKEPC

[Katanai]

Hm... They are making it impossible for me to buy a netbook. When I was ready to get one, bam Nvidia comes out with a new chipset. Good I'll wait for that. Now VIA comes out with this I so want one, but when will they be available?

[MrMilli]

Originally Posted by Katanai

Hm... They are making it impossible for me to buy a netbook. When I was ready to get one, bam Nvidia comes out with a new chipset. Good I'll wait for that. Now VIA comes out with this I so want one, but when will they be available?

Katanai i encourage you to wait for the Nano 9000 which will be a 3Ghz quad core while using only 9w. ETA 2014. Or you could wait a bit longer for the Nano 12000 ...

On topic: They do mention "new process technology" with dual core Nano. That would suggest the single core will stay 65nm but that the dual core would move beyond that.

[eidairaman1]

Intel started allowing their Old FSB to be used by 3rd parties. so this is basically C3/C7 again. Just too bad AMD and Nvidia Wont Jump on the wagon to provide SLI and Crossfire Solutions for this platform, who knows it could probably actually compete against Intel.

[PCpraiser100]

Not bad specs, I hope they can dodge the bullet by going right for the throat with 45nm processors.

[Demon_82]

Nice to see that VIA stilll alive and working to present some fight on their level.

[KBD]

Originally Posted by eidairaman1

Intel started allowing their Old FSB to be used by 3rd parties. so this is basically C3/C7 again. Just too bad AMD and Nvidia Wont Jump on the wagon to provide SLI and Crossfire Solutions for this platform, who knows it could probably actually compete against Intel.

i dunno, why would you want SLI and Crossfire for this platform? its for netbooks and such. So its not really for gaming and the power saving features will be negated by dual GPUs. And i think they already compete with Intel, this Nano is a competitor of the Atom and now with dual-core variants the competition will get even more severe.

[MrMilli]

Originally Posted by eidairaman1

I so this is basically C3/C7 again.

Eeeeeeeeeh .... dude ....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VIA_Isaiah
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VIA_C7

[lemonadesoda]

If current (nearly impossible to find) Nano is anything to go by, dual-core Nano is going to need plenty of active cooling and will be 40W of nastyness on full load (compared to 8W for Atom). Too hot and thirsty for netbooks.

[craigo]

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=597

via = awesome

and im an intel guy, a mate just pit together a htpc with the intel bits in the link, its a great little rig but if i ever replace the sempron of doom for my htpc ill be using a via based rig

[eidairaman1]

Originally Posted by KBD

i dunno, why would you want SLI and Crossfire for this platform? its for netbooks and such. So its not really for gaming and the power saving features will be negated by dual GPUs. And i think they already compete with Intel, this Nano is a competitor of the Atom and now with dual-core variants the competition will get even more severe.

I was talking about a Desktop or Replacement Solution.

[mlee49]

new avvy anyone?

[cdawall]

Originally Posted by lemonadesoda

If current (nearly impossible to find) Nano is anything to go by, dual-core Nano is going to need plenty of active cooling and will be 40W of nastyness on full load (compared to 8W for Atom). Too hot and thirsty for netbooks.

were did you find it was going to be 40w? thats higher than a mobile C2D...intels new mobile quad is only 45w that can't be right

[lemonadesoda]

From VIA's very own whitepaper on the Nano:



The desktop VIA's (single core) run at 17 or 25TDP depending on model. Double that minus a bit for dual core. QED

PS. Idle power may be low... but if you are going for one of these things (dual core), unless it is sitting in a "redundant NAS/server" you arent going to let the CPU sit idle all day... so TDP's are relevant. However, then CAN clock down and use very little power if idle. But in a modern day OS, how "idle" can you get with all those background services and antivirus?

source: http://www.via.com.tw/en/downloads/w...29VIA_Nano.pdf


EXTRA EXTRA!

Look, there is a single core Nano, with a big fat active cooler on the CPU (comment relative to Atom, of course).

Listen, IMO, the Nano is great. Horses for courses. In fact, benchies suggest Nano faster than Atom. And therefore Dual core Nano > Dual core Atom too. BUT, if you want a ULV system, then there are question marks on power TDP. If you have a "passive" server, this may be fine. It will kick into action and do the work, then sit idle at low power until required again. But it you have an "active" server, then Atom is the winner in the cool and quiet stakes.

[KBD]

Originally Posted by eidairaman1

I was talking about a Desktop or Replacement Solution.

oh, ok i see. yea, would be nice if VIA made some "normal" desktop CPUs but i guess they found their niche in low cost low power market. But we may see desktop CPUs from them if Intel squeezes them out of their current niche.

[Valdez]

Originally Posted by lemonadesoda

From VIA's very own whitepaper on the Nano:



The desktop VIA's (single core) run at 17 or 25TDP depending on model. Double that minus a bit for dual core. QED

PS. Idle power may be low... but if you are going for one of these things (dual core), unless it is sitting in a "redundant NAS/server" you arent going to let the CPU sit idle all day... so TDP's are relevant. However, then CAN clock down and use very little power if idle. But in a modern day OS, how "idle" can you get with all those background services and antivirus?

source: http://www.via.com.tw/en/downloads/w...29VIA_Nano.pdf


EXTRA EXTRA!

Look, there is a single core Nano, with a big fat active cooler on the CPU (comment relative to Atom, of course).

Listen, IMO, the Nano is great. Horses for courses. In fact, benchies suggest Nano faster than Atom. And therefore Dual core Nano > Dual core Atom too. BUT, if you want a ULV system, then there are question marks on power TDP. If you have a "passive" server, this may be fine. It will kick into action and do the work, then sit idle at low power until required again. But it you have an "active" server, then Atom is the winner in the cool and quiet stakes.

You forgot that current Nanos are 65nm. Intel's atom is 45nm.
Via needs to change to 45nm ASAP.

[lemonadesoda]

^ We are comparing available processors, not virtual new-fab size processors Your comment is about as useful as me saying "you forgot Atoms are 45nm, and Intel need to go 32nm for low power dual-core". See? Worthless comment!

[Valdez]

Originally Posted by lemonadesoda

^ We are comparing available processors, not virtual new-fab size processors Your comment is about as useful as me saying "you forgot Atoms are 45nm, and Intel need to go 32nm for low power dual-core". See? Worthless comment!

Then i write it a bit differently. Atom has better tdp because it is 45nm. If nano goes on 45nm then it will be propably better in every aspect than the atom.
Current nanos and atoms are not comparable in tdp aspect, because of different manufacturing process. Intel has a lot of money, and can easily maintain its manufacturing leadership, via can't do it. Because of this there will be no fair competition.

[Hunt3r]

I just want to see this year they start making chips that surprised us
nvidia despite being one of the best

[lemonadesoda]

Originally Posted by Valdez

Then i write it a bit differently. Atom has better tdp because it is 45nm. If nano goes on 45nm then it will be propably better in every aspect than the atom.

Agreed. A 45nm Nano would be much more competitive w.r.t. TDP. Possibly cheaper to manuf. too.

Also, perhaps the TDP comprison is misleading. We should really look at TDP DIVIDED BY performance. Since, so what? if the TDP of the Nano is double the Atom under load, but, at the same time, it's performance is also double.

A better comparison statistic is an index like TDP/Superpi, or TDP/Specmark, or TDP/wPrime, or TDP/MP3 encode time, or something.