Tuesday, December 30th 2008
VIA Preparing Dual-Core Nano 3000 Processor for H2 2009
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
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.
19 Comments on VIA Preparing Dual-Core Nano 3000 Processor for H2 2009
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.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VIA_Isaiah
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VIA_C7
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
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: www.via.com.tw/en/downloads/whitepapers/processors/WP080529VIA_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.
Via needs to change to 45nm ASAP.
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.
nvidia despite being one of the best
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.