LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.New model uses 6-inch IPS screen, Intel Core M3-7Y30 chip, 8GB RAM, and a 128GB M.2 SSD.
Read more.New model uses 6-inch IPS screen, Intel Core M3-7Y30 chip, 8GB RAM, and a 128GB M.2 SSD.
Really impressive performance, but still would have preferred some kind of low end ryzen apu or even a 150MX
wouldn't the power usage be too high with ryzen?
It's got a 4.5 W CPU - ryzen has a way to go before it'll fit in that chassis, and any dedicated GPU is out. Could work with a mobile phone SoC running windows, but those are the only real competition at this TDP
I think there are two issues with AMD chips here - firstly they're unproven and have some compatibility issues which would likely mean extended R&D to flush these out. Then you have the high TDP which means they're just not suited to something this small. Intel may be more expensive but it's a more mature platform, the bugs and nuances are better known. Counter to this, use of the Intel chip rather than AMD will mean that you won't be able to fry an egg on it which does mean losing a potential feature.
I think the issue with a mobile SoC is that you'll be limited to either emulating or games that are compiled for ARM. Isn't the idea here that the whole thing is x86 games compatible on the move? Frankly if you want to play mobile phone games, just use your phone and a portable charger.
As AMD have an ARM license, and Windows 10 will run in semi-emulation on upcoming hardware, that may be the route they go down (with AMD graphics). AMDs x86 chips in this power envelope topped out with A10 Micro-6700T Mullins I think, which is a long way behind this. Don't think they have anything else close in this power envelope.
Mobile Ryzen can work with a TDP of 9W, so double what we have here but that is with twice the cores and usable graphics so cutting Ryzen down to 2 core 4 thread and halving the clock speeds would probably get AMD a 4.5W part without too much hassle. A genuine 2 core and reduced SP die would be better.Originally Posted by Xlucine
But I have to wonder what people actually play on these things? I have had problems gaming at 1366x768 so I imagine 1280x720 is way worse, and having heard my kids complain about their Atom 2 in 1 machines (with way better 10" screens) being unable to run anything interesting because they are Windows 10 and all the interesting games are Android I find this baffling.
Spend less, get a Nintendo Switch.
I love the idea of these things, especially if they can run games like Skyrim and potentially serve as UMPC type things. I still miss my Psions and such.
If it were that simple then AMD would have launched it already (together with Raven Ridge) and not in the official roadmaps yet.
Guess you never heard of GPD Win 2's highly successful predecessor GPD Win which features an Intel Atom SoC. Look around Youtube for numerous reviews and gameplays of the original GPD Win. Some even managed to install Android on it. Quite capable of running most games especially indie ones on Steam. Using emulators are also popular. GPD Win 2's much faster SoC with high single thread performance, emulators would benefit the most.
Cheaper, yes but closed ecosystem (limited to games published for the system). That is why the original GPD Win despite higher prices was still popular because of open ecosystem.
Looks nice enough. Might make a good replacement for my portable diagnostic computer.
Understandably this is slightly besides the point, but with Ryzen AMD's CPU's are running cooler and use less juice than their corresponding Intel counterparts overall. So that meme is slowly dying out.
That said AMD doesn't have anything in such a small factor that can currently compete as far as I know.
AMD had planned ARM based SoCs like Amur and Lanner Falcon although both were scrapped. Intel also had ARM license from legacy XScale (which was sold to Marvell) and acquisitions (like Infineon and Altera). For example, Intel's Altera FPGAs uses ARM cores. But Intel still stuck to x86 for their mobile SoCs because there are too many competing ARM based SoCs (from Qualcomm, Mediatek, Samsung, HiSilicon, Rockchip, Broadcom, etc) saturating the market. Perhaps AMD also saw this (and subsequently cancelled both Amur and Lanner Falcon). Emulation will always have performance penalties, especially if single thread performance not strong enough. Check out UltrabookReview preview of Asus NovaGo TP370QL (with Qualcomm's Snapdragon 835 running Windows 10 on ARM) as they managed to get some benchmark results (Cinebench R11.5, Passmark, Octane v2, etc). Early indications points to Intel's Atom level of CPU performance and sometimes worse (in Cinebench R11.5 MT, Passmark, Octane v2, etc).
The only mobile device using A10 Micro-6700T was AMD's Discovery reference tablet. BungBungame Photon 2 tablet was supposed to use A10 Micro-6700T, but instead used a slower A6 Micro-6500T (which strangely was missing in AMD's tablet APUs product list). Thus big question mark about A10 Micro-6700T usage in small mobile devices like tablets (perhaps unforseen problems encountered such as heat and battery life). Handheld devices like GPD Win is much smaller than AMD's Discovery reference tablet.
It's not on the consumer roadmaps, but the embedded/industrial roadmap has always had a 2C/3CU SKU on, and the corresponding engineering sample has been seen in the wild. The only question is whether they'll produce mainstream consumer products using that die or keep it for embedded/industrial/semi-custom. But either way, AMD are making a 2 core, 4 thread, 192 shader APU die, which is less than half the silicon of 4C Raven Ridge, and could therefore reasonably be expected to work in half the TDP of 4C Raven Ridge.
AMD have previously gone after the tablet market with really nice chips that couldn't compete with Intel giving the Atoms away. Once burnt, I can't see them trying again any time soon.
Is/was the similar Pandora device any good?
As far as I know, those AMD engineering samples were actually Stoney Ridge and Merlin Falcon which were still using AMD's older Excavator cores. The lowest TDP for Stoney Ridge is 6W (for AMD E2-9000e only) and for Merlin Falcon is 12W. These are still in production and no replacements have been forthcoming yet.
Quite unlikely to see those 2 core 4 thread APUs anytime soon, since even the current Raven Ridge chip looks to be in short supply (possibly due to slow product ramp). That is why there are so few notebooks using AMD's Raven Ridge, at last count three only. Also currently HP's Envy x360 is the only one available although Acer's Swift 3 could be coming soon while Lenovo's IdeaPad has yet to emerge.
Lets not forget HP which had a chance to use AMD's Mullins chips for a tablet product (such as the ElitePad series), but instead ended up in low end notebooks like HP Stream 14 series (which used A4 Micro-6400T). Should be noted that HP never used A10 Micro-6700T in any of their notebook products either. For some reason, most of AMD's A10 Micro-6700T chips ended up at Compulab. Thus after numerous delays, BungBungame Photon 2 remains the only production tablet that uses AMD's (A6 Micro-6500T) Mullins chip, which was made obselete by the time it finally launched due to its high price and competition from more powerful tablets powered by Intel's Core M series chips (which were also in the same price range). Also BungBungame Photon 2's high price meant that its not competing in the same sector as much cheaper tablets powered by Intel's Atom chips.
Yes, similar but GPD Win 2 is much more powerful (especially in the CPU department).
Last edited by LordRetroGamer; 21-12-2017 at 09:40 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote