• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

VIA Preparing Dual-Core Nano 3000 Processor for H2 2009

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
47,308 (7.52/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
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.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2008
Messages
1,110 (0.18/day)
Hm... :banghead: 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 :banghead: I so want one, but when will they be available?
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
289 (0.05/day)
Location
Antwerp, Belgium
Hm... :banghead: 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 :banghead: 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 ... :roll:

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

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
42,713 (6.69/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2×BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
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

New Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
1,062 (0.18/day)
System Name REBEL R1
Processor Core i7 920
Motherboard ASUS P6T
Cooling Stock
Memory 6GB OCZ GOLD TC LV Kit 1866MHz@1.65V 9-9-9-24
Video Card(s) Two Sapphire HD 5770 Vapor-X Xfire'd and OC'd (920/1330)
Storage Seagate 7200.11 500GB 32MB
Case Antec Three Hundred
Audio Device(s) ASUS Xonar D1 PCI Sound Card
Power Supply OCZ StealthXStream 500W
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
Benchmark Scores 16585 Performance Score on 3DMark Vantage
Not bad specs, I hope they can dodge the bullet by going right for the throat with 45nm processors.
 
Joined
Apr 9, 2006
Messages
100 (0.01/day)
System Name Hell PC
Processor Intel Core i7 4820k @ 4'50GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-X79-UD3 BIOS F17
Cooling Noctua NH-D14
Memory 4x 4GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 1333
Video Card(s) Asus GTX 770 Direct CU II @ 1306/3746
Storage OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SATA III, Seagate 1'5TB SATA II, Seagate 2TB SATA III
Display(s) Acer V243HAObd
Case Thermaltake Overseer RX-1
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek ALC898 HD 7.1
Power Supply Nox Pulsar Blue 750w
Software Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 x64
Benchmark Scores 3Dmark Ice Storm: 176205 3Dmark Cloud Gate: 25357 3Dmark Fire Strike: 7760
Nice to see that VIA stilll alive and working to present some fight on their level.
 

KBD

New Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
2,477 (0.38/day)
Location
The Rotten Big Apple
Processor Intel e8600 @ 4.9 Ghz
Motherboard DFI Lanparty DK X48-T2RSB Plus
Cooling Water
Memory 2GB (2 x 1GB) of Buffalo Firestix DDR2-1066
Video Card(s) MSI Radeon HD 4870 1GB OC (820/950) & tweaking
Storage 2x 74GB Velociraptors in RAID 0; 320 GB Barracuda 7200.10
Display(s) 22" Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070SB
Case Silverstone TJ09-BW
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Profesional
Power Supply Ultra X3 800W
Software Windows XP Pro w/ SP3
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.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
7,223 (1.08/day)
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.
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.
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
42,713 (6.69/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2×BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
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.
 
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
8,523 (1.37/day)
Location
Kansas City
System Name The Dove Box Rev 5.0
Processor 9800x3D
Motherboard Asus 870E STRIX
Cooling Custom Water
Memory 32 GB 6400 MTs
Video Card(s) Asus 3080 TUF
Storage 2TB Crucial T705
Display(s) 32" LG 1440p 180hz
Case Lian Li O11 Dynamic
Audio Device(s) ON BOARD FTW
Power Supply Corsair 1000W
Mouse Corsair something
Keyboard Steelseries
Software Win 10 64x
new avvy anyone?

 

cdawall

where the hell are my stars
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Messages
27,680 (4.11/day)
Location
Houston
System Name All the cores
Processor 2990WX
Motherboard Asrock X399M
Cooling CPU-XSPC RayStorm Neo, 2x240mm+360mm, D5PWM+140mL, GPU-2x360mm, 2xbyski, D4+D5+100mL
Memory 4x16GB G.Skill 3600
Video Card(s) (2) EVGA SC BLACK 1080Ti's
Storage 2x Samsung SM951 512GB, Samsung PM961 512GB
Display(s) Dell UP2414Q 3840X2160@60hz
Case Caselabs Mercury S5+pedestal
Audio Device(s) Fischer HA-02->Fischer FA-002W High edition/FA-003/Jubilate/FA-011 depending on my mood
Power Supply Seasonic Prime 1200w
Mouse Thermaltake Theron, Steam controller
Keyboard Keychron K8
Software W10P
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
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
7,223 (1.08/day)
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.
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/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.
 
Last edited:

KBD

New Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
2,477 (0.38/day)
Location
The Rotten Big Apple
Processor Intel e8600 @ 4.9 Ghz
Motherboard DFI Lanparty DK X48-T2RSB Plus
Cooling Water
Memory 2GB (2 x 1GB) of Buffalo Firestix DDR2-1066
Video Card(s) MSI Radeon HD 4870 1GB OC (820/950) & tweaking
Storage 2x 74GB Velociraptors in RAID 0; 320 GB Barracuda 7200.10
Display(s) 22" Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070SB
Case Silverstone TJ09-BW
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Profesional
Power Supply Ultra X3 800W
Software Windows XP Pro w/ SP3
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.
 
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Messages
294 (0.04/day)
Location
Szekszárd, Hungary
Processor AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
Motherboard Asus M4A785TD-V Evo
Cooling Xigmatek HDT S1283
Memory 4GB Kingston Hyperx DDR3
Video Card(s) GigaByte Radeon HD3870 512MB GDDR4
Storage WD Caviar Black 640GB, Hitachi Deskstar T7K250 250GB
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster F2380M
Audio Device(s) Creative Audigy ES 5.1
Power Supply Corsair VX550
Software Microsoft Windows 7 Professional x64
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/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.


You forgot that current Nanos are 65nm. Intel's atom is 45nm.
Via needs to change to 45nm ASAP.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
7,223 (1.08/day)
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.
^ We are comparing available processors, not virtual new-fab size processors :banghead: 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!
 
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Messages
294 (0.04/day)
Location
Szekszárd, Hungary
Processor AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
Motherboard Asus M4A785TD-V Evo
Cooling Xigmatek HDT S1283
Memory 4GB Kingston Hyperx DDR3
Video Card(s) GigaByte Radeon HD3870 512MB GDDR4
Storage WD Caviar Black 640GB, Hitachi Deskstar T7K250 250GB
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster F2380M
Audio Device(s) Creative Audigy ES 5.1
Power Supply Corsair VX550
Software Microsoft Windows 7 Professional x64
^ We are comparing available processors, not virtual new-fab size processors :banghead: 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.
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
355 (0.06/day)
Location
Brazil - São Paulo
System Name "I2I3 Overclocking Team"
Processor Phenom II x6 1090T 3.2
Motherboard ASUS M4A785TD-V EVO
Cooling Stoock
Memory G.SKILLl Ripjaws 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR3-1600
Video Card(s) Geforce 9800gx2 EVGA
Storage Sansung 500GB
Display(s) LG
Case Box motherboard
Software Windows 7
Benchmark Scores Hunt3r
I just want to see this year they start making chips that surprised us
nvidia despite being one of the best
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
7,223 (1.08/day)
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.
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.
 
Top