VIA Launches VIA Nano Processor Family

[Mussels]

i've always had bad luck with via chipset motherboards (nearly always driver related) but these low power systems do intruige... 99% of the time, i use my main big rig simply for anime. I'd love to get a media capable PC for ultra low power use, with blu ray capabilities (a standalone player cant do it, as i also have a crapload of avi/MKV files)

I guess my next build, will be a pure media system with native HDMI... hehe. and i will definately be looking at these via's as a base - that chart showed isaiah, is that the nano? or is the nano even faster again (they mention 4x faster in the press release)

 

[Rebo&Zooty]

the driver problems in my exp only effect systems that arent using via cpu's, 100% via platforms tend to have no problems like amd/intel via setups did/do

 

[lemonadesoda]

I have a lot of experience with VIA chipsets in mini ITX format. Used to build quite a few of them for NAS, mini-server, and productivity workstations.

However, I junked them and replaced them with Intel Dothan, due to the fact that the performance of the dothan was SO MUCH better, and the net total power consumption, incl. HDD, chipset, etc. was not a lot different. With the Dothan you can run any app., dual screens, video, even encode. With the VIA they were really a pain as a sit-and-use-it PC, although fine for NAS, simple server, etc. TBH, the old VIA couldnt really cope with running MS Office. With the Dothans you can photoshop and more.

***
LOL
***

I just ran CrystalMark2004R3 on my PC for comparison.

ALU 46,545
FPU 56,159

I'll run the benchmarks on the Dothan box later, and add them to this post. Unfortunately I cant run them on the old VIA boxes... they've been decommissioned.



If the new VIA nano matches the Dothan, or more, then great. I'd be very interested.

 

[MrMilli]

I have a lot of experience with VIA chipsets in mini ITX format. Used to build quite a few of them for NAS, mini-server, and productivity workstations.

However, I junked them and replaced them with Intel Dothan, due to the fact that the performance of the dothan was SO MUCH better, and the net total power consumption, incl. HDD, chipset, etc. was not a lot different. With the Dothan you can run any app., dual screens, video, even encode. With the VIA they were really a pain as a sit-and-use-it PC, although fine for NAS, simple server, etc. TBH, the old VIA couldnt really cope with running MS Office. With the Dothans you can photoshop and more.

***
LOL
***

I just ran CrystalMark2003R4 on my PC for comparison.

ALU 46,545
FPU 56,159

I'll run the benchmarks on the Dothan box later, and add them to this post. Unfortunately I cant run them on the old VIA boxes... they've been decommissioned.



If the new VIA nano matches the Dothan, or more, then great. I'd be very interested.

Can you post CrystalMark2004R3 results so they would be comparable!

 

[lemonadesoda]

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showpost.php?p=815396&postcount=1

Results of Pentium Dothan @ 1.50 are:

ALU 5542
FPU 6541

Result:

Dothan is faster than Atom.
About same as VIA nano on average of ALU and FPU
Celeron-M and Dothan seem to have approx the same scores. Clock-for-clock.