[...] tasks that people do so a strong CPU is a must-have. The VIA Nano is, clock-for-clock, likely to be much more powerful than an Atom so a  good choice for processing power but with it’s relatively high thermal power rating, [...]

But I just can’t wait any longer!
No news from VIA when we will see a VIA UMPC on the market in the EU?
The MSI Wind is released in Sweden this week (long over due I know). So if I’m lucky a could get a VIA Nano UMPC just before Christmas or probably next year.
Or a could order a MSI Wind NOW!!!

[...] the video. Meet you all outside for the fight later   More info on the Nano range and performance here. Posted in processor [...]

“Another part of Intel’s push for energy efficiency is the idea of “hurry up and get idle”. Basically, this describes the theory that even if a processor uses more power at load than another CPU, if it can get the work that needs to be done completed a certain amount faster than the less power consuming CPU, the former will actually use less TOTAL power and thus bring you longer battery life in the long run.”

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=591&type=expert

If you apply the hurry up and get idle theory to VIA Nano and Intel Atom…. VIA Nano does draw less power to do tasks and will be better for battery life as evidenced here:

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=597&type=expert&pid=8

Cheers,

Tim

I had the little valley for testing and also the little falls (detailed comparison is coming up) but when i compare them to the Nano reference design, i would go for the Nano. The features of the cpu and the chipset are boosting up your overall performance quite a lot (compared to the 2 intel mini-itx solutions).
The board itself is way better equipped (PCIe, 2 memory slots, etc.) and even though we are always comparing hundrets of benchmarks, i can tell you it even feels faster on any desktop!
To really feel a difference in performance of a system on the desktop, you need to have an overall difference of some 20%.

Anyways, this is their first generation of this new architecture and it is a very promising start. The Nano is – when we just look at the features – at least one generation ahead of the Atom, now let’s see which devices will feature it and how the U-series will look like, especially the U2400.

It is not only power draw needed to execute a task that is important but the time period of drawing that power while executing the task as well that will actually affect your battery life. So that you can know the total amount of energy drawn during the completion of the task.

Ryan Shrout the editor of PC Perspective actually did some sample tests of measuring power usage over time comparing the VIA Nano and Intel Atom:

“Using the same method to gauge the results of our CineBench 10 test, we find that the VIA Nano used 63,434 watt-seconds (Joules) of energy to render the scene while the Intel Atom used 65,893 watt-seconds (Joules) of energy – an advantage of 3.8% to the VIA CPU.

These kinds of power comparisons are incredibly insightful and you can clearly see how both teams of CPU designers have made trade offs for the either power consumption or speed. The VIA Nano L2100 is able to perform these tasks faster (by as much as 30% in some cases) while still using less total energy than Intel’s Atom. ”

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=597&type=expert&pid=8

So in most “real world” usage scenarios… Nano also beats Atom with less power consumption.

Power consumption/TDP/ is a tricky area that most people don’t understand well.

When the Nano beats Atom in performance, suddenly the power consumption factor is taken into considerations, and it’s still a crap.

My suggestion is trying to sell the company to Nvidia to give it another hope.

[...] Źródło informacji: http://www.umpcportal.com/2008/07/via-nano-info-and-test-reveals-umpc-friendly-products-atom-like-pe... [...]

http://www.techpowerup.com/65155/NVIDIA_Could_Dump_VIA_for_Intel_Atom.html

I don’t see things improving until the manufacturers adress the whole system. Its partly excusable in the cheaper devices (even just the SC3 & M912) but even the expensive devices lack coherent design.

Looking at Nano realistically isn’t it just catching up to old Celeron-M series?

let’s wait and see!