9 watt Athlon 64 CPU

Lou Sid · Post by **Lou Sid** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 5:31 pm

Anyone else spotted this article?

http://www.pcworld.com/resource/printab ... 441,00.asp

An Athlon 64 CPU dissipating only 9 watts sound rather nice! I wonder if they will be generally available.

qviri · Post by **qviri** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 5:57 pm

The "Athlon 64 1500+" part makes me suspect it's just a factory undervolted and underclocked A64.

Maybe a mobile Sempron64... The mobiles have better tolerances for lower voltages, so with an underclock this massive, they could probably go down to ~0.75V...

StarfishChris · Post by **StarfishChris** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 6:58 pm

More info on the processor
At 1.3GHz and presumably undervolted to 1v or less, 9W is perfectly reasonable with a Venice core (if you could take it to 1v!). It makes you wonder what changes they have made.

qviri · Post by **qviri** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 7:09 pm

Geek.com calls this "Athlon 4", not "Athlon 64"... Makes you wonder if PCWorld messed up the names, since such a thing as an Athlon Mobile 4 did exist and was the predecessor of XP-Ms I do believe.

autoboy · Post by **autoboy** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 7:35 pm

That article was written in 2002. They are talking about the athlon 4 not the athlon 64 1500+

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 9:45 pm

qviri wrote:Geek.com calls this "Athlon 4", not "Athlon 64"... Makes you wonder if PCWorld messed up the names, since such a thing as an Athlon Mobile 4 did exist and was the predecessor of XP-Ms I do believe.

Come on!

Check out hp.com. It is an A64 with ULI chipset, nothing else.

qviri · Post by **qviri** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 10:46 pm

I blame Chris

StarfishChris · Post by **StarfishChris** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 4:08 am

It was intentional, honest

Either way it's unlikely to be of any more use to us than a more easily available desktop A64. Not one to be concerned about IMO.