•  Ramman
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Member Topic Starter
VIA is adding the C7-M to it's mobile line up. It's geared towards ultra-lite laptops. Get this, it comes in three flavors, 1.5, 1.8, and 2GHz. Nice to see VIA getting a mobile proc at 2GHz in their 90nM core. It's not going to challenge Intel or AMD for pure computing power. But, its power consumption is only 20 watts at full load and 100mW at idle. That's where it's strength lies. Get the most out of that battery!

One of the down sides is VIA is still relying on S3 Pro Savage8 onboard for vid. That's fine for normal surfing, office apps, and some multimedia work, but then again, VIA procs are not known for their gaming ability . Although, there was a head to head with VIA, Intel, and AMD for video encoding a while back. VIA beat out AMD and ran neck to neck with Intel, and actually pulling ahead of Intel in a couple of benches. Not too shabby for the Cinderella of procs. Yes Cinderella, if Intel is Goliath and AMD is David, that has to put VIA as Cinderella, to paraphrase CNET .

Go visit VIA's site. They are having a contest to win a laptop with the new C7-M. You have to play a soccer vid game and advance through their "soccer camps" to the pro level. The highest score wins the laptop.

Have Fun!
The big problem with that video card and in truth almost all of the laptops today, is that from what I've read they're not going to be able to run Vista, or at least not in it's full glory

I've heard that you're going to want:
1) a 64 bit cpu (which leaves only AMD in the market)
2) A 256mb or more video card (Dell issued a statement in a tech forum that 128mb video cards weren't cutting it), and that right there is a major downer because there are not too many 256mb video cards on AMD machines....and the final nail:
3) The graphics module must be PCI-E to get certified. I've been told that AGP simply won't cut it (it's a little slow in beta 1 right now, but sure looks nice, and I'm told beta 2 will look nicer). So what we're basically limited to, asuming you're buying today for something that can at the bare minimum, run tomorrow's probably a $3000 or more AMD gaming laptop that works great for guys like me who bench 300+ lbs routinely and don't have any problem lagging a 10+lb monster everywhere with them, but isn't so great for people who value:
a) smaller size
b) smaller weight
c) lower cost
d) longer batter life
or any combo there-of.
4) If the rumors of 64 bit only are true (and I hope they are, because if not, AMD will have been totally shafted on the 64 bit desktop), then they'll need memory. Lots of it, and lower energy (DDR2...that's right...DDR2 on the laptops consume less energy and standard ddr.

Dual core would also be really nice, and since we know the chances of intel doing anything but a horrible kludge to the pm platform, here's my advise to amd:
1) Get with DDR2 in a hurry with the next batch of turions.
2) While you're at it, why not just go dual core? Lower those clocks a bit and even offer some cranked fairly far back so that we can get long life off of them. Heck I wouldn't mind buying a cpu that could determine load and thread needs and idle 1 cpu and raise the clock of the other a few hundred mhz if it felt it needed more single threaded performance, or sit back and and lower the frequency and get going on two cores. This kind of logic needs to happen, and needs to happen in the mobile market first.
3) Video cards...look I would love to have a 7800 go or what not, but for people who don't want that much punch, for pete's sake pls start offering x300's in 256mb flavours, and 6200's in the same. Not with hyper this or whatever that, but with dedicated memory, k thanks.
4) Last but not least, stop this law suit business with intel. Intel reps have openly admitted you have a great product, and that the competition helps the industry. I'm sure they do shady stuff too, but they do it in the shade. I don't mind it getting exposed, but going after them publicly for stuff we've all heard a dozen times over wreaks of 'poor winner' and considering the intel could have put the nail in your coffin a couple of years back but was busy raking the money in instead, I'd be greatful and just good enough be and drop this BS law suit.
  •  Ramman
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Member Topic Starter
So true as far as Vista goes. But, I wonder how many people are going to rush out and get it as soon as it comes on the market. Sure there will be the tech heads and the wannabe's that will jump on it. But I have to look at the people that are still running 98SE and ME and are happy with it. Well maybe not ME . Heck I know a few that are still running 95 because they are used to it and don't want to change.

Personally I think MS has put too much bloat into Vista. So much in fact that the specs needed to run it are going to turn too many people off. Look at the reaction to XP. It took a good long time before it managed to get into mainstream. I just have a feeling that Vista is going to be another ME.

But, I wonder how many people are going to rush out and get it as soon as it comes on the market.

I think it's safe to say that:
a) All the big OEMS will jump on it instantly
b) All the same people (and some new ones) that bought 95, and XP on week one will not have yet learned their lesson, and do so again
c) It's going to be a tech support nightmare for a lot of people, but owners of computer repair stores will be saying "Cha-ching" for at least 6 months.
hey, is there any new benchmarks? i'd love to see the benches of that cpu
  •  Ramman
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Member Topic Starter
Haven't seen any yet. But, that doesn't mean they're not out there. Do a Google search for the C7-M, something might pop up.
Is this the cpu that's supposedly half as fast as a pentium m at the same clock speed, but given the work to power done is still over twice as efficient? If so, I wonder if/when Via will venture into the cpu market...low end dual cores wouldn't be bad, even dual cpu/dual core running at less heat/power than a single desktop cpu would be impressive in some fields.
"from what I've read they're not going to be able to run Vista, or at least not in it's full glory"

Cheer up my friend......I've been testing it on this model laptop for the last week and it runs like a champ!!!!
whats your batery life on that......45 min's lol
lol, even the new versions of Vista beta still do not have all the full features. We'll see what comes of it, but I fully expect MS to pull some BS and have only high end rigs running Vista.
Oh Microsoft is planning on more than that.....and Intel is in the middle of this scheme. I talked with my uncle today(he works for Intel). He said on Monday that Intel submitted 325 patents and they are all expected to be cleared by the patent office by the end of the month. He said what they did was patent everyway to make the Athlon 64 into a 128 or 256 bit Processor. And then they patented more ways to make their own into those types of chips. Any future possiblity for AMD to double is gone, zapped. He said they have virtually nothing to build on for the 128 bit platform. They can't build off of their own technology because Intel now owns the ways for them to make it. Now they don't own the chips. But the technology to improve it. And get this Microsoft was the company to encourage this activity. They told Intel and no one else that they are preparing for a huge OS in 2008 or 2009. And it's expected to go 128 bit. I told my uncle that he works for a new evil company. He laughed and said they didn't do anything ilegal. But I think it's unethical. He said it was AMD's fault for not going ahead but I said they probably didn't know they needed to. And he said yep....Microsoft helped out alot. Time to switch to Linux for good. I think having 2 companies was good for prices. But this needs to be looked into by AMD and their lawers. They have to stop this.
Odd, because transmeta owns a ton of 128bit patents, and ATi and nVidia both own tons of 256 bit patents. I'd say your uncle probably doesn't understand the situation very well, but being as he's an intel employee, he might just be getting their PR schlock lol. Who knows 😉 Either way, Intel's still not ready to do a dedicated 64 bit cpu uintil 2010 or late 2009 at this point according to their spokesman's last mantra. Let's see where they go from there ;-P