To: mas_ who wrote (255264 ) 8/5/2008 6:04:44 PM From: wbmw Respond to of 275872 Re: The laptop power consumption is not based solely on the cpu. Stop concentrating on just the cpu which means squat by itself. First, you have to make up your mind. If you're wanting to gloat about one CPU's superiority over another, then you're probably comparing power and performance at the socket level. If you're talking about how this raw power and performance advantage translates into an end-user experience (which accounts for more than the previous academic discussion), then you're probably more interested in the system level performance and power. But all that aside, my point still remains the same: Atom is superior in terms of performance/watt, especially in the "netbook" segment which seems to be where all the volumes are. While reviewers have been mostly focused on the Atom "nettops" - probably because desktop like systems are easier to review - the fact remains that the version of Atom found in mobile applications is lower power, and comes with a lower power chipset, than the one used in recent reviews. And not only would I expect actual Atom based "netbooks" to outperform similar designs with Nano (due to having to use lower performance 5.0W Nano chips in the same small form factor), but I would also expect some end-users to value the low power and small form factors over similarly (or higher) priced Sempron based laptops, and as a result, AMD may see some arbitrage, which is another way of saying that low end Atom based laptops are cannibalizing the higher performing Sempron based laptops. It probably won't be huge, but it may be noticeable when the MSS figures come out. And of course, Intel may see the same thing relative to Celeron.