<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Atom Z670, Intel&#8217;s Answer To Tegra 2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.slashgear.com/the-atom-z670-intels-answer-to-tegra-2-11145535/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.slashgear.com/the-atom-z670-intels-answer-to-tegra-2-11145535/</link>
	<description>Feeding Your Gadget and Tech Obsessions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 15:04:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Susanna Dang</title>
		<link>http://www.slashgear.com/the-atom-z670-intels-answer-to-tegra-2-11145535/#comment-110332</link>
		<dc:creator>Susanna Dang</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Apr 2011 23:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashgear.com/?p=145535#comment-110332</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[galaxy is 7]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>galaxy is 7</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Fubar</title>
		<link>http://www.slashgear.com/the-atom-z670-intels-answer-to-tegra-2-11145535/#comment-104971</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin Fubar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:27:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashgear.com/?p=145535#comment-104971</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Intel&#039;s press release specifically mentioned the Slider to be Z670 based device.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Intel&#8217;s press release specifically mentioned the Slider to be Z670 based device.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sola</title>
		<link>http://www.slashgear.com/the-atom-z670-intels-answer-to-tegra-2-11145535/#comment-104793</link>
		<dc:creator>sola</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashgear.com/?p=145535#comment-104793</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This article says nothing about TDPs so it probably means that Oak Trail still has very bad power consumption characteristics compared to modern ARM SOCs.

This explains nicely why none of the serious tablet producers have selected Intel chips for their volume products (I don&#039;t count &gt;900USD tablets, these are obviously for company use, typically with Windows).

A tablet under 6 hours of battery runtime is dead in the water since all serious Android tablets are better than this by a large margin (like 8-9) and the tablet-leader iPad has 10 hours. 

Without the obvious lack of TDP numbers we can assume that even Oak Trail tablets will struggle to get into the 6-hour range even with large batteries (which is not tablet friendly) so I wouldn&#039;t expect too much from this platform.

Also, the 45nm process is quite behind. Modern ARM SOCs are produced at 40-45 nm NOW and they are moving to 28nm by the end of the year (OMAP5, Tegra3). Oak Trail could be significantly more competitive if produced on a 22-28nm process. Without this, I just wouldn&#039;t select it if I was a tablet manufacturer. It is simply still not good enough. Not by a big margin.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This article says nothing about TDPs so it probably means that Oak Trail still has very bad power consumption characteristics compared to modern ARM SOCs.</p>
<p>This explains nicely why none of the serious tablet producers have selected Intel chips for their volume products (I don&#8217;t count &gt;900USD tablets, these are obviously for company use, typically with Windows).</p>
<p>A tablet under 6 hours of battery runtime is dead in the water since all serious Android tablets are better than this by a large margin (like 8-9) and the tablet-leader iPad has 10 hours. </p>
<p>Without the obvious lack of TDP numbers we can assume that even Oak Trail tablets will struggle to get into the 6-hour range even with large batteries (which is not tablet friendly) so I wouldn&#8217;t expect too much from this platform.</p>
<p>Also, the 45nm process is quite behind. Modern ARM SOCs are produced at 40-45 nm NOW and they are moving to 28nm by the end of the year (OMAP5, Tegra3). Oak Trail could be significantly more competitive if produced on a 22-28nm process. Without this, I just wouldn&#8217;t select it if I was a tablet manufacturer. It is simply still not good enough. Not by a big margin.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sola</title>
		<link>http://www.slashgear.com/the-atom-z670-intels-answer-to-tegra-2-11145535/#comment-104792</link>
		<dc:creator>sola</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashgear.com/?p=145535#comment-104792</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As far as I know, both the Slider and Transformer are Tegra2 based.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As far as I know, both the Slider and Transformer are Tegra2 based.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Hall</title>
		<link>http://www.slashgear.com/the-atom-z670-intels-answer-to-tegra-2-11145535/#comment-104700</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Hall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 12:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashgear.com/?p=145535#comment-104700</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It doesn&#039;t surprise me that Intel have this, they&#039;re always very capable in this sector. I also see that AMD is moving into the mobile sector too, will be good to see competition from the x86 side of things.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It doesn&#8217;t surprise me that Intel have this, they&#8217;re always very capable in this sector. I also see that AMD is moving into the mobile sector too, will be good to see competition from the x86 side of things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Hall</title>
		<link>http://www.slashgear.com/the-atom-z670-intels-answer-to-tegra-2-11145535/#comment-104701</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Hall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 12:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashgear.com/?p=145535#comment-104701</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It doesn&#039;t surprise me that Intel have this, they&#039;re always very capable in this sector. I also see that AMD is moving into the mobile sector too, will be good to see competition from the x86 side of things.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It doesn&#8217;t surprise me that Intel have this, they&#8217;re always very capable in this sector. I also see that AMD is moving into the mobile sector too, will be good to see competition from the x86 side of things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Magnesus</title>
		<link>http://www.slashgear.com/the-atom-z670-intels-answer-to-tegra-2-11145535/#comment-104576</link>
		<dc:creator>Magnesus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashgear.com/?p=145535#comment-104576</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EeePad Slider was supposed to be a Tegra2 device, almost identical to Asus Transformer. Are you sure that changed?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EeePad Slider was supposed to be a Tegra2 device, almost identical to Asus Transformer. Are you sure that changed?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
