News Nvidia responds to Intel’s anti-Ion propaganda

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/02/25/nvidia-responds-to-intel-document/1

Nvidia retaliates to Intel's claims about Ion with a presentation of its own, claiming that Ion offers 10x the performance using 55 percent less space than Intel's own Atom chipset.

 

As childish as this all is, competition between big companies is never a bad thing: so roll on the handbags!

 

Intel: "your mama's fat"
Nvidia: "no, your mama's fat"

*pulls up a seat and grabs some popcorn*
this could be fun to watch.

 

what ever comes of this i still want one!!

 

+1

 

AMD: "We offer 1 chip solution 20x faster then 4 year old Intel and 1 year old Nvidia designs, and we don't need a second manufacturer for the CPU, because we already have them"

 

lol, so right. this would be a perfect time for AMD to come out with a Fusion-based mobile platform. I imagine Intel and nVidia would probably be stunned into silence too

to borrow from Arkanrais...
Intel: "your mama's fat"
Nvidia: "no, your mama's fat"
AMD: "well, i f**ked both your mamas. at the same time. aaaall niiiiight loooong"

 

Why not both?

I would like to see both platforms out there.
It would be great to see two types of netbooks out there one which is more of the same we have: Long battery life, low power and functional. The other a slightly heavier(possibly due to larger battery) slightly higher power, handles HD video for watching some movie on a larger external screen, some games ability. It would also be cool if CUDA could be used to boost performance in processor hungry applications.

 

Gimme the VIAs!

 

Nvidia hasn`t come up with a problem free chipset since the Nforce2 days, lots of problems with their new 790 range and integrated graphics for laptops overheating. I`m still on their Nforce4 chipset, i have to disable the built in hardware firewall because it corrupts my connection, I believe Nvidia has stated that the whole thing is "broken" and can`t be fixed, that doesn`t help me, i paid full price for my mobo. My next chipset won`t be Nvidia, even if they score the most points in all the benchmarks in the universe

 

Hmmm, well I wouldn't mind it could do both. Using the Netbook as a near silent media device accessing my NAS...great!

 

"To make its point, Nvidia published results from MobileMark 2007... Intel-based system lasted for 2hrs40mins, Nvidia-based system lasted for 2hrs31mins."
Skuze me, but if nVidia wanted to make its point, surely the battery life would be greater than Intel's, not smaller?? Or am I being stupid today.

 

It's not the size of the chip, it's the motion in the electronic ocean.

 

Intel was saying that Ion's power consumption was twice that of the Diamondville platform... meaning half the battery life. Nvidia is basically saying that the power consumption isn't much higher than the current Diamondville platform, but it has a much better feature set.

 

How exactly did nVidia get these results anyway? i know the article says "from MobileMark 2007", but MobileMark appears to perform a set of 4 tests then gives a score (like 3DMark and PCMark), whereas the article (and nVidia's comment) makes it sound more a set of tasks that runs the battery until its dead.
Is there a chance Intel's claim to power consumption is based off, for example, having an IM client, email client that checks for messages every 10 minutes and a script that retrieves a set of webpages over and over (with a delay between each) all over wifi until the battery ran dead? To me, that seems more indicative of "normal power consumption" for a netbook, rather than the MobileMark benchmarking tool nVidia has used in its claims.
I think this bickering between the two companies needs less spin and more independently supplied facts

 

MobileMark is actually pretty good at replicating real usage - loading, using and closing apps, browsing the internet, etc. Intel merely talked about thermal design power in the document it leaked.

 

okay why is there anytime someone is stating that something is faster then the other it always or typically ends up being 10 times faster? I mean do they just like that number or is there a more educated reason like people associate 10 better or something lol, anyhow this will be interesting although competition is good in this case this is competition that wont really help us anytime soon.

 

The 3DMark scores (I know, grain of salt required) were 129 and 1,300 respectively.

 

Tablespoon of salt, more likely, but yeah the ION completely annihilates the 945GC chipset in nearly everything. And does so while using only slightly more power.

nVidia = winner (at least, assuming they can find anyone to make netbooks with their ION boards)

 

For an HTPC that on occasion has to do more the Ion platform is looking beautiful. I like the idea of a CPU that will have a power usage refgstered in single digit watts but usually the integrated graphics are pathetic to say the least.

I want a mini ITX system that'll do 1080P video without frying itself and/or stuttering.

The Intel Atom 330 looks to be the chip, the GMA 950 definitely isn't the chipset. Only VGA output? Excuse me? DVI at the least and HDMI is preferable. The only chipset that offers that at the mo on a mini ITX is Fly Creek and that uses a Core 2 Duo to run it. Ion seems to be aimed at the HTPC/netbook market and I wish them the best of luck (mostly because I want one!)

I'm trying to build an HTPC at the moment but I want it to have at least a little bit of "oomph". The X4500HD on the Fly Creek looks to be able to deliver that but I want a low power CPU, not a full Core 2 Duo.

To sum it up - "Yay nVidia! Keep going!"