32-nm Cedarview Atoms pop up online

Intel has quietly added a pair of next-generation Atom processors to Ark, its online archive of product specifications. The chips are part of the Cedar Trail platform, whose Cedarview CPUs are the first Atoms to be built on 32-nm process technology. Existing Pineview Atom CPUs are fabbed on a 45-nm process.

So, how does the new hotness compare? Like so. The latest Atom D2500 and D2700 chips run at 1.86 and 2.13GHz, respectively, so they’re faster than their predecessors. They’ll work with quicker memory, too. Pineview’s memory controller only supports DDR3 memory speeds up to 800MHz, but Cedarview can push the memory clock to 1066MHz.

Although clock speeds are up, power consumption is down. The new Atoms have a 10W TDP, which is 3W lower than Pineview. This improvement is particularly impressive in light of the fact that Cedarview is supposed to feature DirectX 10.1-class integrated graphics with robust video decoding capabilities, which would be a big upgrade over the GPU built into Pineview.

Last month, the rumor mill suggested that Intel was having problems with Cedarview graphics drivers, which might be limited to DirectX 9 and 32-bit operating systems to start. Intel’s driver site does little to dispel that notion; it doesn’t have any drivers listed for the D2500 or D2700 just yet. We’ve asked Intel about the state of its Cedarview graphics drivers and will update this post when we have an official response.

If you were hoping the arrival of the D2500 and D2700 means that next-gen Atom netbooks are imminent, you might want to hold tight. The D-series chips are meant for nettops, and Intel hasn’t lifted the lid on any N-series derivatives targeted at the mobile market. The fact that the new CPUs are $11-21 cheaper than the old models is encouraging, though.

Comments closed
    • ronch
    • 9 years ago

    I hope Bulldozer wouldn’t be competing with Atoms performance-wise when it finally comes out someday.

      • NeelyCam
      • 9 years ago

      In multi-thread benchmarks BD should be superior, but single-threaded applications are a different story altogether.

    • LoneWolf15
    • 9 years ago

    “The D-series chips are meant for nettops, and Intel hasn’t lifted the lid on any N-series derivatives targeted at the mobile market”

    That didn’t stop vendors from using desktop Atoms in netbooks before.

    ASUS has used dual-core desktop Atoms in some of its Ion-graphics netbooks.

    • Rza79
    • 9 years ago

    From what I could gather of the internet, the GPU (called GMA3600) is based on the PowerVR SGX545. Frequency should be between 400 and 667Mhz.
    If this is true, 3D performance will be pathetic.

    I’ve found one IPC manufacturer that uses this processor:
    [url<]http://www.wibtek.com/products/MotherBoard/show/?pid=1000035[/url<] They mention 32bit and 64bit drivers!

    • tay
    • 9 years ago

    No VT-d or VT-x for virtualization.
    No AES-NI for encryption.

    Does Brazos support either or AMD’s equivalent?

      • SonicSilicon
      • 9 years ago

      Brazos includes AMD’s x86 virtualization, AMD-V.
      As for AES, it doesn’t seem to have hardware support, but I’m not really finding anything that specifically states it being one way or the other.

        • Game_boy
        • 9 years ago

        Bobcat does not support AES-NI in silicon, so no. AMD does not segment by instruction support though, so when they add it to Bobcat in a revision or two then it will do (since it is implemented in BD)

          • tay
          • 9 years ago

          Ok, thanks for the responses. These days you never know if you need to virtualize even on these puny cpu’s.

            • BlackStar
            • 9 years ago

            VirtualBox works great on my E-350 netbook, much better than expected! (I keep several VMs with Linux and WinXP for testing software).

            This is one thing AMD gets right: ulike Intel, they don’t remove features for artificial market segmentation. That, and an awesome low-power DX11 GPU with stable drivers that annihilates pretty much everything Intel has to offer (PowerVR SGX545, really Intel? Will you never learn?)

      • ew
      • 9 years ago

      Not sure about AES-NI (I guess probably not) but according to Wikipedia they do support AMD-V for visualization.

    • Farting Bob
    • 9 years ago

    Higher clocks, lower power consumption, better GPU (when drivers are finished maybe) and lower priced? I know people like to bitch about atom, but this seems like a very good step towards battling AMD’s e-350 and co. But hey, some people wont be happy until they completely redesign the chip from the ground up.

      • UberGerbil
      • 9 years ago

      Unfinished drivers basically un-better the GPU, however good it might be (and without working drivers, how can we know?) They certainly could vastly improve Atom with a better GPU, particularly if they pick up some of the dedicated video decode stuff from Sandy Bridge’s IGP. That would, I guess, “Ion-ize” Atom.

      But it’s all for naught if the drivers are a mess.

        • wierdo
        • 9 years ago

        Exactly. Drivers Drivers Drivers, it’s the reason I gave up on Sis and Matrox’s products long time ago, driver quality/support was not up to snuff.

      • SomeOtherGeek
      • 9 years ago

      Yep, I concur. I think this would be a great backup server chip.

        • OneArmedScissor
        • 9 years ago

        If they integrated the memory controller for real this time, it could be a lot more interesting for servers than that.

        I have a feeling that’s the underlying reason why Intel held Atom back for so long. If they really pushed it as far as it could go, people trying to cut down on power use would flock to it instead of their pricier Xeons.

        With Bobcat about to become a quad-core system on a chip, a GPU-less version for bazillion socket servers might be even more interesting. I could be completely wrong, but I’d have to figure that including the SATA controller in each CPU would simplify the spider web of back and forth holding such a thing back.

      • jimbo75
      • 9 years ago
        • Farting Bob
        • 9 years ago

        How do you know its slower than previous Atoms clock for clock?

        And in a cheap netbook or fileserver it does its job fine. I would know, ive used an earlier (single core woot!) Atom, and a Brazos and both were fine for what i wanted them to do. If you know what you want your system to do, and do your research then you shouldnt be dissapointed with what you get.

    • Chrispy_
    • 9 years ago

    Any mention of how potent these new IGPs are?

    Atom’s weakness was never how underpowered it is, but the ageing and useless platform it ran on (IIRC, Pinetrail just brought the pathetic GMA3100 on-die for power-savings and did little else).

    As long as the IGP is powerful enough to keep up with the lowly CPU, it’ll be an excellent low-power marriage.

      • puppetworx
      • 9 years ago

      Agreed. From time to time it’s nice to watch a SD youtube video on one of these devices without it tearing and stuttering. It’s not much of a ‘netbook’ if it can’t handle SD flash video.

        • BlackStar
        • 9 years ago

        For comparison, AMD’s E-350 can handle 1080p flash video smoothly. Intel must hold a record in bad GPU design, they’ve been trying for what, 10 years,and they’ve failed pretty much every time!

        And don’t get me started on their driver support. (Using PowerVR makes things even worse. Last time they used an all PowerVR core, they failed to support OpenGL completely and didn’t even release Linux drivers).

          • Airmantharp
          • 9 years ago

          You should try Sandy Bridge, and read an Ivy Bridge preview or two.

          And remember that Atom is more of a commercialized experiment than a formal undertaking- it still doesn’t have a huge market.

          Shrinking x86 to compete with ARM is still just a dream for them :).

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This