I wrote this article for the latest issue of CPU Magazine. Check it out online over here...!
AMD has finally taken the covers off a platform that could yield the benefits that many of us were expecting from the company’s acquisition of ATI. There has been some hype around the Internet about AMD Puma, aka Turion Ultra. Many people are calling it a Centrino Killer, and I’m doing my best to strip away all the marketing fluff while determining the market this platform will appeal to.
So, let’s see. AMD has not been known of late for making ultra-efficient CPUs like Intel, and the Turion Ultra CPU has not changed much from the previous generation. Yes, the new Turion Ultra processors feature 2MB of cache as opposed to 1MB, but the TDP has not decreased; I believe we’re still looking at 32- to 35-watt processors.
Take it from someone who knows notebook design; when you’re trying to cool a high-density processor with 2MB of cache, it does not make things easy. In fact, it makes our lives downright difficult when you include a discrete GPU, as well. (But what if we didn’t have to worry about a high-powered GPU? More on that in a moment.)
So, while Intel is toying with 12 to 20W processors in the ultraportable category, AMD is still back in 2005 with its 35W part. AMD has also introduced some new battery-saving elements into the platform, but as far as I’m concerned, the best and only way to save battery is to use more efficient components.
On the graphics side, it’s a very different story. AMD-ATI has always been known for creating unique mobile platforms with great image quality. Though it has faced fierce competition from Nvidia, thanks to MXM and some of the previous-generation GPUs, things are starting to change. In the mobile battle, I would say that AMD has some slight advantages for the moment.
Nvidia chose a strategic direction that sort of put it at odds with Intel—and Nvidia was quite open about this at CES—but as history has shown, these relationships can usually be rebuilt overnight.
Oddly enough, AMD seems to be Intel’s preferred partner for discrete graphics, at least until Intel gets its own graphics off the ground.
ATI has the distinct advantage of being integrated with a CPU company, therefore it can work with AMD’s CPU people to create unique platforms in volume. So, one could say that they are the preferred partner of AMD, too.
AMD’s latest Radeon HD 3000 and HD 4000 chipsets have given us compelling reasons to use the company’s graphics in current and future platforms. Seriously, in case you haven’t seen these things, everything has changed, from image quality to feature set and software.
AMD has nothing to lose; following the acquisition of ATI, it lost market share and was simply out-executed by Intel, and had no choice but to focus on its long-term plan. It seems to be paying off.
So now you have a so-so CPU coupled with a killer IGP, thanks to the graphics side of the house. What does that mean in terms of platform development?
On the ultraportable side, Intel wins hands-down. On the enthusiast side, I’d have to give it to Intel, as well, when coupled with discrete graphics from either AMD or Nvidia. You won’t see any bleeding-edge thin-and-light designs with Puma inside, but you might see some killer budget notebooks taking the sub-$1,000 market by storm. This should not be taken lightly; it’s the bulk of the overall notebook market and is growing at an astonishing rate.
So, while Puma may not deliver the ultimate in battery life or cutting-edge design, if AMD can deliver on its promise, the platform will crush the competition in the area of price/performance. The bottom line is Puma is a cool platform with great new possibilities.
You gotta love competition. I have to wonder if Intel will cut its prices in half just to make it hard to switch over. I also have to wonder whether AMD can execute in volume; I guess we’ll have to wait and see.
AMD has finally taken the covers off a platform that could yield the benefits that many of us were expecting from the company’s acquisition of ATI. There has been some hype around the Internet about AMD Puma, aka Turion Ultra. Many people are calling it a Centrino Killer, and I’m doing my best to strip away all the marketing fluff while determining the market this platform will appeal to.
So, let’s see. AMD has not been known of late for making ultra-efficient CPUs like Intel, and the Turion Ultra CPU has not changed much from the previous generation. Yes, the new Turion Ultra processors feature 2MB of cache as opposed to 1MB, but the TDP has not decreased; I believe we’re still looking at 32- to 35-watt processors.
Take it from someone who knows notebook design; when you’re trying to cool a high-density processor with 2MB of cache, it does not make things easy. In fact, it makes our lives downright difficult when you include a discrete GPU, as well. (But what if we didn’t have to worry about a high-powered GPU? More on that in a moment.)
So, while Intel is toying with 12 to 20W processors in the ultraportable category, AMD is still back in 2005 with its 35W part. AMD has also introduced some new battery-saving elements into the platform, but as far as I’m concerned, the best and only way to save battery is to use more efficient components.
On the graphics side, it’s a very different story. AMD-ATI has always been known for creating unique mobile platforms with great image quality. Though it has faced fierce competition from Nvidia, thanks to MXM and some of the previous-generation GPUs, things are starting to change. In the mobile battle, I would say that AMD has some slight advantages for the moment.
Nvidia chose a strategic direction that sort of put it at odds with Intel—and Nvidia was quite open about this at CES—but as history has shown, these relationships can usually be rebuilt overnight.
Oddly enough, AMD seems to be Intel’s preferred partner for discrete graphics, at least until Intel gets its own graphics off the ground.
ATI has the distinct advantage of being integrated with a CPU company, therefore it can work with AMD’s CPU people to create unique platforms in volume. So, one could say that they are the preferred partner of AMD, too.
AMD’s latest Radeon HD 3000 and HD 4000 chipsets have given us compelling reasons to use the company’s graphics in current and future platforms. Seriously, in case you haven’t seen these things, everything has changed, from image quality to feature set and software.
AMD has nothing to lose; following the acquisition of ATI, it lost market share and was simply out-executed by Intel, and had no choice but to focus on its long-term plan. It seems to be paying off.
So now you have a so-so CPU coupled with a killer IGP, thanks to the graphics side of the house. What does that mean in terms of platform development?
On the ultraportable side, Intel wins hands-down. On the enthusiast side, I’d have to give it to Intel, as well, when coupled with discrete graphics from either AMD or Nvidia. You won’t see any bleeding-edge thin-and-light designs with Puma inside, but you might see some killer budget notebooks taking the sub-$1,000 market by storm. This should not be taken lightly; it’s the bulk of the overall notebook market and is growing at an astonishing rate.
So, while Puma may not deliver the ultimate in battery life or cutting-edge design, if AMD can deliver on its promise, the platform will crush the competition in the area of price/performance. The bottom line is Puma is a cool platform with great new possibilities.
You gotta love competition. I have to wonder if Intel will cut its prices in half just to make it hard to switch over. I also have to wonder whether AMD can execute in volume; I guess we’ll have to wait and see.
3 blogger comments:
I do wish you would stop with the cheerleading and hyperbole.
'if AMD can deliver on its promise, the platform will crush the competition in the area of price/performance'
'The bottom line is Puma is a cool platform with great new possibilities'
Possibilities for what? Gaming on a laptop? What specifically makes it cool, a very good IGP?
Why do you feel the need to say crush or blow away? Is it just to jazz up articles? You really, genuinely believe Puma is going to crush Centrino in price / performance? (Not competitive, or better, but crush?) Could you define what "crush" means? >50% better?
Any update on how much K10 is blowing away the competition? Rather than conjecture, how about waiting for some facts? (Although you claimed to have some of those when making the K10 statements)
I read about the rumblings of this some time ago. Nvidia and AMD basically have different design philosophies. AMD has gone down the route of value by ganging multiple mediocre GPUs together while Nvidia is pushing technology breakthroughs on a single chip for their high-end products. I came to the same conclusion that you did that AMD is in a better position to dominate because its value chips will deliver good enough performance for most people in the market for a sub $1000 laptop. However, for those of us into performance and style, this won't do. Also, who says Nvidia can't bring a value GPU to the table also.
I'm in agreement with Kuro. There really is no middle ground when it comes to laptop technology. If you intend to buy a "value" laptop, you look for two things:
portability and battery life.
If you want a high end business laptop, you look for:
portability and battery life.
If you want a laptop for creative purposes or gaming, then you want:
graphics horsepower and battery life.
Simple fact is, battery life is always at the top of the list. Intel's focus on energy efficient designs is just intelligent. A great low-end graphics solution with only adequate battery life doesn't seem like a great strategy for AMD. They can make great laptop tech for portability and battery life or try to maximize graphics horsepower and still get decent battery life... anything in between really won't be that compelling.
That's not to say that balanced performance is not important but there are just natural trade-offs. For instance, The new Envy gets less than four hours battery life but has such great portability not too mention some important design innovations (such as the removable battery), that people will accept the trade-off. But what kind of innovations can we expect based on AMD's platform? Based on the power requirements, I'd guess not many.
If AMD is going to go this route, it'll need to make parts with lower power consumption. A sub-$1000 notebook with great graphics won't look as compelling with a sub-three-hour battery life. If I was designing a sub-$1000 laptop, my design goal would be 4 hours battery life at 4lbs or less (assuming at least business class graphics capabilities). I'd put the best keyboard on it that I could, the smallest screen that will allow Windows to be usable (with great resolution), and the biggest battery that a 4lb design will allow. Could you produce that with Puma? I doubt it.
(BTW, HP already has a solid design with its new Mini-note. Very close to ideal as a form factor IMO.)
Post a Comment