• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

NVIDIA to Work on Intel Atom Core Logic

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
34,320 (9.23/day)
Likes
17,423
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name Long shelf-life potato
Processor Intel Core i7-4770K
Motherboard ASUS Z97-A
Cooling Xigmatek Aegir CPU Cooler
Memory 16GB Kingston HyperX Beast DDR3-1866
Video Card(s) 2x GeForce GTX 970 SLI
Storage ADATA SU800 512GB
Display(s) Samsung U28D590D 28-inch 4K
Case Cooler Master CM690 Window
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D PCIe
Power Supply Corsair HX850W
Mouse Razer Abyssus 2014
Keyboard Microsoft Sidewinder X4
Software Windows 10 Pro Creators Update
#1
NVIDIA will have the opportunity to design platform core logic (chipsets) for the Intel Atom processor, in the weeks to come. The visual computing giant has had a fair bit of success with its MCP79 chipset for mainstream PCs, which could be ported to platforms with much smaller footprints, such as netbooks and nettops. The starting point in its roadmap could well be the MCP79 itself which has architectural superiority over Intel chipsets in the same range, for being of a monolithic design.

Show full news post
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
6,374 (1.55/day)
Likes
983
System Name ICE-QUAD // ICE-CRUNCH
Processor Q6600 // 2x Xeon 5472
Memory 2GB DDR // 8GB FB-DIMM
Video Card(s) HD3850-AGP // FireGL 3400
Display(s) 2 x Samsung 204Ts = 3200x1200
Audio Device(s) Audigy 2
Software Windows Server 2003 R2 as a Workstation now migrated to W10 with regrets.
#2
Intel and Nvidia will join forces to enable Nvidia chipset support to the Atom platform in order to enhance graphics performance
Key info. Intel isnt looking at Nvidia to design a whole chipset for Intel; but is looking for a simple (outsourced) solution to improving integrated graphics in nettops.
 

Bl4ck

New Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
74 (0.02/day)
Likes
9
Location
Mental Hospital called Poland
System Name the HandsomeRulerOfTheUniverse was taken
Processor Q6600 G0 @ 3600Mhz @1.35V~1.4
Motherboard MSI P35Neo2 FIR
Cooling LC - EK Multioption res,EK DC 4.0, Swiftech Apogee GT, Feser Tubes.
Memory 2x2GB Kingston HyperX
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX275 overclocked.
Storage Samsung F1 750GB
Display(s) LG 2261VP-PF HDMI
Case Coolermaster Dominator (RC690)
Audio Device(s) X-Fi Extreme Gamer
Power Supply Corsair HX520
Software Win7 Ultimate x64
#3
I you look at the overall TDP of an Intel Atom + i945 we have near 40Watts of power draw, but if you look at great ATI/AMD chipsets + low wattage Athlon X2 like 25 or 30watts we have the same power draw but more bang for the buck on AMD side. Intel did nothing spectacular with simplifying the Cpu architecture and by that approach they minimized the power draw, but they reused their old i945 ect. with ridiculous-mediocre (for todays standards) power draw and features.
 

DrPepper

The Doctor is in the house
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
7,482 (2.07/day)
Likes
799
Location
Scotland (It rains alot)
System Name Rusky
Processor Intel Core i7 D0 3.8Ghz
Motherboard Asus P6T
Cooling Thermaltake Dark Knight
Memory 12GB Patriot Viper's 1866mhz 9-9-9-24
Video Card(s) GTX470 1280MB
Storage OCZ Summit 60GB + Samsung 1TB + Samsung 2TB
Display(s) Sharp Aquos L32X20E 1920 x 1080
Case Silverstone Raven RV01
Power Supply Corsair 650 Watt
Software Windows 7 x64
Benchmark Scores 3DMark06 - 18064 http://img.techpowerup.org/090720/Capture002.jpg
#4
Compared to the semprons I find the atom a fail even though it has a lower power draw.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
6,374 (1.55/day)
Likes
983
System Name ICE-QUAD // ICE-CRUNCH
Processor Q6600 // 2x Xeon 5472
Memory 2GB DDR // 8GB FB-DIMM
Video Card(s) HD3850-AGP // FireGL 3400
Display(s) 2 x Samsung 204Ts = 3200x1200
Audio Device(s) Audigy 2
Software Windows Server 2003 R2 as a Workstation now migrated to W10 with regrets.
#5
Agreed. It's quite silly how inefficient an Atom based system is. At a minimum they should have made a low power 45nm shrink of the 945. Better still, they would have cut features (e.g. PCIe lanes) and introduced better power management and clock downs since the Atom is designed for netbook/top and NAS use.

Given the power consumption, its probably better to go with the Core 2 Mobile series Txxx and the laptop chipset.
 
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
498 (0.12/day)
Likes
41
#6
Someone should make a atom board without integrated GFX and a x16 pci-e slot. A monolithic chipset and a 4350 would probably end up lower power usage and if not at least be worth using in a HTPC. Regardless I'll must likely be getting a daulcore atom mobo to replace my parents 1gh VIA ITX I built for them years ago.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
6,374 (1.55/day)
Likes
983
System Name ICE-QUAD // ICE-CRUNCH
Processor Q6600 // 2x Xeon 5472
Memory 2GB DDR // 8GB FB-DIMM
Video Card(s) HD3850-AGP // FireGL 3400
Display(s) 2 x Samsung 204Ts = 3200x1200
Audio Device(s) Audigy 2
Software Windows Server 2003 R2 as a Workstation now migrated to W10 with regrets.
#7
Oh man, I built a 1Ghz VIA ITX some years ago and it sucked so bad I swapped it for a mini ITX intel P3 800. And the P3 SMOKED the VIA. I'm very wary of VIA after their EPIA claims. All those fantastic benchmark figures that meant diddly squat in the real world.
 
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
498 (0.12/day)
Likes
41
#8
I'm running XP with everything turned off and 512mb of pc 133 with a ATI 7500 pci card so it's not all that bad for what my mom does. which is look at the internet on a 56k[ 33k max connection speed] usb modem and my dad wouldn't even touch the thing.
Via older cpu's are P3 arc based but with somethings like cache size reduced to cut back on power consumption. The nano I believe is there first CPU arc not licensed from Intel and preforms pretty well but uses about 25w. I would consider a nano based system if the price wasn't so high. Via can't compete with Intel on production cost and will probably priced out of the ITX market sooner or later.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,274 (5.51/day)
Likes
10,361
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 4790K@4.6GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z97 Extreme6
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR3-1866 9-10-9-27
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX960 STRIX @ 1500/1900
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Corsair 650D Black
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#9
I you look at the overall TDP of an Intel Atom + i945 we have near 40Watts of power draw, but if you look at great ATI/AMD chipsets + low wattage Athlon X2 like 25 or 30watts we have the same power draw but more bang for the buck on AMD side. Intel did nothing spectacular with simplifying the Cpu architecture and by that approach they minimized the power draw, but they reused their old i945 ect. with ridiculous-mediocre (for todays standards) power draw and features.
I don't know where you are getting your power numbers, but they are way off. My ASUS EeePC, with the 10" screen on full brightness, under load only draws 20w. The Maximum TDP of the N270 Atom is 2.5w, the maximum TDP of the i945 chipset used in netbooks is 6w, and the southbridge's TDP is 3.3w. So the whole setup is only using 11.8w.

Moving to the AMD side, there is nothing that offers the same power draw, but more performance. Plenty that offers more performance with more power draw though. AMD's side doesn't offer the same power draw. The CPU alone(which is just an underclocked Sempron) consumes 8w, after adding in the chipset, power consumption for the AMD solution is nearing 20w by itself, without the rest of the components.

Compared to the semprons I find the atom a fail even though it has a lower power draw.
The Semprons definitely perform better, but in this market, performance isn't the main focus. It just has to be good enough to access the internet and run Office. Which the single core Atom is more than capable of. Power consumption is king in the nettop world, people want 4+Hour battery life, which you simply can't do with a Sempron machine.

Agreed. It's quite silly how inefficient an Atom based system is. At a minimum they should have made a low power 45nm shrink of the 945. Better still, they would have cut features (e.g. PCIe lanes) and introduced better power management and clock downs since the Atom is designed for netbook/top and NAS use.

Given the power consumption, its probably better to go with the Core 2 Mobile series Txxx and the laptop chipset.
They did cut features, the i945 chipset used in Atom machines is very different from the original i945. They have even gone as far as cutting out Dual-Channel memory support, which isn't really an issue as most nettops/netbooks only have one memory slot anyway.

A process shrink would definitely have been nice though, and hopefully nVidia can release some chipsets that offer a little better video experience, and maybe better power demands.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
6,374 (1.55/day)
Likes
983
System Name ICE-QUAD // ICE-CRUNCH
Processor Q6600 // 2x Xeon 5472
Memory 2GB DDR // 8GB FB-DIMM
Video Card(s) HD3850-AGP // FireGL 3400
Display(s) 2 x Samsung 204Ts = 3200x1200
Audio Device(s) Audigy 2
Software Windows Server 2003 R2 as a Workstation now migrated to W10 with regrets.
#10
^ thanks for the info.
 
Joined
Apr 21, 2008
Messages
5,230 (1.49/day)
Likes
661
Location
IRAQ-Baghdad
System Name MASTER
Processor Core i7 3930k run at 4.4ghz
Motherboard Asus Rampage IV extreme
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 4x4G kingston hyperx beast 2400mhz
Video Card(s) 2X EVGA GTX680
Storage 2X Crusial M4 256g raid0, 1TbWD g, 2x500 WD B
Display(s) Samsung 27' 1080P LED 3D monitior 2ms
Case CoolerMaster Chosmos II
Audio Device(s) Creative sound blaster X-FI Titanum champion,Creative speakers 7.1 T7900
Power Supply Corsair 1200i, Logitch G500 Mouse, headset Corsair vengeance 1500
Software Win7 64bit Ultimate
Benchmark Scores 3d mark 2011: testing
#11
friends are back after big war nvidia lose it before , hahaha , no one can beat intel mum