Originally Posted by DuckieHo
The 680i performed well initially when compared to Intel at the time.
...but you're considering total system TDP.
Fusion vs Atom cores.... Atom wins at performance/watt. You also have to consider that Atom is a 3-yr old design.
Only in memory, in HDD performance the ICH7R was faster, and iirc nVidia lost in USB performance as well? And network performance.
Compare cores, fine, but I'm not going to only be running a core, am I? I'm going to be running a full system, considering (iirc) AMD has more stuff on die than Atom, no-wonder they have higher power usage, but the best way to test this stuff out is in a real system (equal specs bar the stuff that needs to change) doing real world stuff, like browsing the internet, gaming, movies, etc.
Originally Posted by FtL1776
AMD fanboys zzzz
Atom still has the CPU power in its hands, all of the AMD Fusion crap you guys been posting is all about video playback. Its always Fusion vs Atom and always about graphics whilst ignoring Oak Trail which from specs wise to actual OEMs using it over the Neo, points to it being better.
Isn't Oak Trail aimed at tablets and smartphones? AMD Fusion would be faster in that case, but not in performance/watt...And the Neo is for laptops, oh, and iirc the Fusion CPU is faster clock for clock than the Atom, GPU independent.
And if you're referring to me as an AMD Fanboy, my Core i3 laptop says hi, as does the Core 2 Duo E8300 I upgraded from to this Phenom II.