Nvidia's Ion: Lending Atom Some Wings
Table of contents
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Hardware Under The Hood
- 3. So, What About Intel?
- 4. GeForce 9400M Versus 945GC
- 5. Test Setup
Nvidia’s GeForce 9400 launch garnered the company a lot of publicity. After all, the chipset provided exactly what the market had been waiting for:
- It’s compatible with Intel processors; with all due respect to AMD fans, up until Phenom II launched, these offered the best performance and lowest power consumption.
- It’s built around modern graphics circuitry that’s as powerful as an entry-level GeForce add-in, and can decode HD video.
- It does all of this with relatively low power consumption and a small footprint.
The GeForce 9400, and its mobile version, the 9400M, offer a lot more than Intel’s mobile chipsets. That’s particularly true in the area of graphics performance, be it for entry-level desktop PCs, multi-use computers, “home cinema” boxes, or laptops/notebooks. Apple, by the way, made its position clear, going so far as to totally abandon Intel’s integrated chipsets in its MacBook line of notebooks.
But beyond standard desktops and notebooks, Nvidia is aiming at the netbook and nettop market—a lucrative one in tight economic times like these. To go after that market, Nvidia developed its Ion platform. Unveiled a few weeks ago, the Ion reference platform consists of a case containing a pico-ITX motherboard with an Nvidia 9400M chipset and the de rigueur Intel Atom processor.
Does Atom + 9400M add up to the best compromise between sufficient performance, flexibility, and lower energy consumption? Is the classic Intel platform really outmoded? To find out, we tested the very first Ion platform we could get our hands on, and compared it to the first Intel Atom board: the D945GCLF.
Latest Motherboards News
Latest Motherboards reviews
- 12/01 – Seven $260-$320 X79 Express Motherboards, Reviewed
- 07/12 – Ultimate X79? Five £230+ LGA 2011 Motherboards, Reviewed
- 07/11 – Five £130 To £195 990FX-Based Socket AM3+...
- 13/10 – Man Vs. Machine: Four Automatic Overclocking Techs, Compared
- 19/09 – Round-Up: Four Z68 Motherboards From £190 To £260
Any reason in particular you used different OSs in this comparison?
Lol, 136 3d marks for Intel chipset :-)
Any reason in particular you used different OSs in this comparison?
Yes : we had to keep Nvidia reference platform as it was (Nvidia had installed Vista Business), and didn't have a business edition on hand to install on our comparison platform. Both were updated and we selected the services running in the background so there really shouldn't be any significant difference due to the OS.
Yes : we had to keep Nvidia reference platform as it was (Nvidia had installed Vista Business), and didn't have a business edition on hand to install on our comparison platform. Both were updated and we selected the services running in the background so there really shouldn't be any significant difference due to the OS.
Fair enough, just curious, seemed unusual but makes sense now.
Good article, would love to build a HTPC based on this platform (the girly wouldn't complain either!) The Ion system is however lacking a PCI/PCIe slot for a TV card making it just shy of perfect! Suppose you can get USB TV cards... *shrug*
LOLOL
ConclusIon
Thanks. Don't forget this is only a reference platform, a demonstrator build by Nvidia for OEM to assess the performance and capabilities of its newest offering. OEM will be able to add or get rid of whatever connectivity.
LOLOLConclusIon
Guess what ? You're the first to notice it
Good article.
Was the AMD / Intel legend on the 3D Mark scores to give AMD fans a boost??
Do you know this would be perfect if the CPU was half decent. Atom for desktop = fail?
Confused; why is there AMD on the performance benchmarks legend( Page 6 )?
Anyone willing to explain, or am I missing something?
Do you know this would be perfect if the CPU was half decent. Atom for desktop = fail?
No the conclusion is:
Atom for gaming = fail!!
As a super low power platform the Ion appears to be great for our times (peak oil, etc.).
HD playback capability is my measure of failure for a desktop platform. One of the reasons why I am not happy with the state of play with GNU/Linux currently (video acceleration is sh*t due to crap drivers from Nvidia and ATI). After all not everyone wants 3D gaming capability (I know it's seems weird to "us").
Bob
Wonderful Review!
Sorry I'm late on this article, but there was nothing new anymore to read on the main page (Tomshardware.com/us) so I came over here!
Next thing Nvidia is looking into is getting CUDA to work on the Ion platform,and righteously!
The platform is strong enough to support the dualcore Atom even, but for sakes of powersaving I guess they preferred to keep with the atom (2 cores in Windows) instead I guess...
Cuda will perhaps do little to games or 3DMark apart from aiding the CPU when it's being maxed out, but perhaps will increase score drastically on pcmark or other desktop benchmarks; especially on Winrar!
A question:
Where can we purchase this ION platform?
It'd be nice to see the ION platform with an extra 8xPCIE port for another graphics card that can run in SLI (Cuda/SLI together would be even better) with the internal card.
This should give some fun to the overclockers, and hopefully provide sufficient fps for casual games, including spore, on perhaps larger detail settings.
If Intel was ever selling it's Atom processors with its own norht/southbridge/memorycontroller (perhaps even it's on-die/on-chip videocard) Ion would probably be done for, unless Nvidia will produce it's own processors.
x86 processors have a patent, so they'll either cost more, or lack performance. (The produced processor needs to be something else as a x86 processor of Intel, 'simulating' x86 environments; & a simulation will almost always decrease performance).
I guess the AMD/Intel text is just a tired or perhaps drunk reviewer