Samsung NC20, Nano 2000, 3000

Elledan

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - April 2010
Joined
Oct 18, 2001
Messages
15,913
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20090104-vias-nano-processor-finally-showing-up-in-systems.html

One bit of news that slipped past us during the holiday season is that Samsung intends to launch a Nano-powered system (the NC20) with a 12.1" screen, Windows XP, 1GB of RAM, and 160GB of hard drive space.

[..]

At present, there are two Nano processors in the pipeline. The first, as best we know, is a dual-core Nano based on what VIA internally refers to as the Nano 2000 architecture. Each of the two processors on this die will apparently be identical to a standard Nano, and the company would likely adopt Intel's MCM approach rather than attempting to build a unified dual-core like AMD. VIA expects to launch this part in the first half of 2009.

The second project is known as the Nano 3000. This processor will feature additional architectural enhancements (SSE4 is a rumored feature) and is expected to draw less power than its predecessor.

Things finally seem to be shaping up :)
 
Any idea of the timeline for the Nano 3000?

Also, I'd bet money that the Nano 2000 doesn't get out the door in the first half of 2009, considering it's pretty much over. I think I just may buy one if it comes out before the end of the summer though.
 
Sure, they'll have one sample at the end of the year, then it'll disappear and pop up as something else in another year with another one-sample deal. Rinse and repeat.
 
I think egg has the nc20

It just whups on other notebooks with 64-bit capability, hardware vt,etc....

I have seen a lot of people having linux issues with it, so I can't consider it yet.
 
I've decided that I'm picking one up as soon as I sell my Sager. The only thing I don't like is that some people are reporting yellow tint to the screen. If mine arrives like that and I can't tweak the settings it will go straight back..
 
The unfavorable reviews surrounding the NC20 tells me to tell you to reconsider (I wanted a NC20 too after <3ing the NC10.. but not anymore). Since the NC20 sells for ~$510, plunking down an extra $80 will get you say, a much more superior Acer Timeline. Or for a similar price a Lenovo S12, amongst other choices.

From Notebookcheck
The performance of VIA Chrome 9 HC IGP is only the halve of current competitors of integrated graphic cards (Intel GMA 950, AMD XPress 1100) and even is overextended with the DirectX 9.0 functions of the Aero interface (of Windows Vista) (usage possible, but only with motion interruptions).

And the Laptopmag review of the NC20 only could pump 4 hours of life from it.
 
It boggles the mind that anything sold today could be lower performance than the GMA 950.
 
Hey now, that was Samsung's decision. They could have chosen another IGP, but the price or power consumption might would have been higher. Considering the market segment, increasing the price any more would have been a bad idea, and increasing the power consumption at the same price would have been a really bad idea, so I think the choice they made was probably a good one. Then, there's the option to wait for a lower power or less expensive alternative, but you would risk losing money in the mean time.
 
You need to do more reading if you think Via offers low power consumption. Offering an inferior IGP that can't do shit but gets worse battery life than Atom... is a good choice?

Waiting for an alternative? You do know there's this platform called... Atom. Puhleez, why even bother defending a company renowned for throwing out vaporware? And when they do put it out there, it can't perform.
 
Oh, and the GMA950 can do shit? And the 945GSE doesn't seem like much to be excited about either. Seeing as the "Atom Platform" (Atom + 945GSE) uses about 8W(more or less depending on which Atom Processor, I guess), and the Nano U2250 and Chrome9 HC3 use about 8W, it comes down to performance.

From what I've read, the 945GSE (the IGP in the "Atom Platform", according to this pdf from Intel's site) isn't much better than the GMA950, aside from the power consumption.

And don't put VIA out just because they've "only put out vaporware". They're still a competitor, or else Intel wouldn't need to compete so fiercely. Apparently, Lenovo thinks VIA might be a good choice; The S12 is configurable with it and the Chrome9 HC3.

And tests have shown (on this site, even) that the difference in power consumption is only slight, especially considering the difference in performance. Of course, I'm sure the larger LCD in the NC20 doesn't help power consumption much.

Anyway, I don't even have a VIA or Intel system, so what do I know? I guess I should find something better to do than argue against someone who doesn't appear to have an open mind in this matter. At the very least, you could point me to a review showing an Intel product doing exceptionally better than VIA's competing product, since I couldn't find one and I obviously don't know anything.

Edit: And Samsung used the Atom platform... in the NC10. I guess they were dissatisfied, or else they couldn't because of Intel's restrictions on the form factors that the Atom platform can be used in...
 
Last edited:
1. GMA950 can run Aero just fine - Notebookcheck already said Via's Chrome has motion interruptions.
2. Um, 945 is the chipset, GMA950 is the IGP; 945 uses a GMA950 IGP. If you can't even distinguish between the two, I'd rather not waste any more time chatting to a wall.
4. Where do you see any mention that Intel is shitting itself from Via? Just cuz they're a "competitor" (and a minuscule one) means that market share's gonna be wildly lost? Puhleez.
5. Samsung offers a Via and it's definitely good. Right, cuz they're the only manufacturer. FYI, Samsung is throwing out a netbook Atom w/ Ion, so by your comments, they must be dissatisfied with Via :rolleyes: (I call this pwning yourself :))
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but the Chrome9 HC3 is pretty useless as any kind of "advantage." It can't even do the one task that it's name variation was given. All in all, it's a very disappointing platform. With the pull out of mainstream PC components, it will be interesting to see how long VIA has left as an independent company.

Hopefully VIA can put together a much better platform by the time it ships dual core mobiles.
 
1. I said nothing about Aero, and who wants that on a netbook anyway?
2. Thanks for the clarification, that makes things much clearer.
4. (3?, I guess you dropped a point in editing) I never said Intel was "shitting [themselves] from [VIA]" (weird way to put it?), I said they were competing fiercely. Who else are they competing with? They aren't competing with themselves; in fact, they're trying as hard as they can not to. If they weren't competing, they wouldn't make a dual-core version, nor would they increase the performance, because people would start to want Atoms instead of Celerons, especially if the price was better.
5. Samsung offers a *book (some would argue it's not a netbook because of certain features, but that's not really important in this discussion) system (the NC20) with a VIA processor. The processor is part of the system and does the processing, the system is the entire product. "If you can't even distinguish between the two, I'd rather not waste my time chatting to a wall" (And for the record, I prefer civil discussions to chatting. But whatever floats your boat). Same goes for the Atom (processor) and Ion (platform), btw.

I may have pwned myself in my last post, but pwning wasn't really my goal to begin with, or else I wouldn't have said the second part. :) They may be dissatisfied with VIA, for all I know. But does this new netbook have the same screensize and features as their NC20? If it doesn't, then that doesn't throw out my argument that they may not have been able to use Atom because of restrictions from Intel.

This page, which it appears you are referring to in your first point, certainly says that it can support Aero with recent drivers. It does not say what clock speed is required for that, though. The 945GSE (according to that page) is clocked at 166Mhz, which is much lower than most of the others on that page. They could have been talking about it, but I find it hard to believe.

If you look at the benchmarks on this and the other page, although there's only a few benchmarks which have these two computers, on Cinebench the NC20 does twice as well as the NC10. In 3DMark 2001 and 05 the NC20 only does slightly worse. There's very little difference in their capabilities. From that, you could hardly say one is much better than the other, and they don't have a video of them using Aero, or watching movies, or playing games, on either. So I can't take their word for it.

Don't tell me you use Aero on your NC10, because whether you do or not, and whether it's smooth and fast or not, I can't take your word for it either; Not just because it seems Intel computers are the only ones you have (which may or may not be true, it's not that important really), but because your arguing against me, your opinions may be biased, as may be mine, which is why it's important to get other's opinions as well as data(video, framerates, benchmarks, what have you) to support your argument. I don't have much (if any), and neither do you, so at this stage the argument is pointless.

I'm looking forward to the Ion platform too, both for Intel and VIA systems. But for now, this is what we've got.
 
Can't be bothered to read through your wall of text, but your last sentence makes me roflmao:

"But for now, this is what we've got." Says enough about how exposed you are.

p.s., don't take it for me about Aero then, ask anyone w/ a netbook + Win7. There's not just one or two users fyi. Via blows and has been blowing for a while, end of story and you're the only one who's all up in arms defending the direction of it.
 
Then I guess you know someone who has a netbook with a VIA processor that has Windows 7 on it. In that case, what is their experience?

I won't bother patching the ignorance that you created by not reading my whole post.
 
That's the thing, I know NO ONE with anything Via in it :)

My "ignorance", is rather "can't be bothered to read your crap". Via makes their Chrome9 IGP if you haven't figured that out by now. Meaning Via's crap (IGP + CPU) is tied together in their whatever platform. *GASP!* Man, now you're peeling things off and just talking about the CPU itself.

Via is competing fiercely with Intel? Done reading any more from you.

p.s. When you say "I don't have much (if any), and neither do you, so at this stage the argument is pointless.", you're saying that I don't have the experience/facts behind it? Then why don' you jump over to the "MOBILE COMPUTING" department and just see how many Win7 netbook users there are instead of camping here at the Via section.
 
Last edited:
"can't be bothered to read your crap" = "I'm ignoring what you wrote because it's crap" = Ignorance.

Intel does the same thing, I fail to see your point.

As a follow up to my previous post:
bigsby said:
It runs win7 aero fine, I get a score of 3.1 in the performance index which is decent enough. Also a good 64-bit chrome driver out now to.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14384208&postcount=116

He later goes on to say that he will be selling it and getting a more powerful machine (core 2 duo), but my point stands.

Edit: I didn't say you don't have any experience, I said we aren't providing much or any data/other's opinions. Read more carefully before replying, please.

And I'm not camping here. I read a lot of other stuff on this site, including the news and various other sections. I do tend to shy away from the Notebook/mobile forum and various others, though.
 
Last edited:
An FYI, the GN40 chipset has been replacing chipsets of newer netbooks.

Don't know what you had to prove by stating my system, man that is the lowest of low blows when people quote other's system and try to bring up something from it.

Your original arguments was something along the lines of Via good, good decision, Via competitor which is all... bad arguments.

Let's review:
- TWO netbooks use Via, one of which has an Atom version and will have an Ion version later (Lenovo S12). There are HOW many netbooks out there? The biggest players don't use Via - Acer, ASUS, MSI, Dell.
- Via has consistently fed the press with bullshit products and has rarely if ever delivered.
- You said 945SE (and subsequently the Atom platform) wasn't much to get excited over. HELLO? ATOM was the start of the netbook phenomena (since Celeron sucked). So technically it's been out for 2? years.
- "And Samsung used the Atom platform... in the NC10. I guess they were dissatisfied, or else they couldn't because of Intel's restrictions on the form factors that the Atom platform can be used in..." So explain why NC10's (N120, N310) successors (released after NC20) uses Atom again.
 
Last edited:
I didn't try to bring something up from it; in fact, I tried to down play it (saying that it's not really important). I agree that it was a low blow, and I apologize, but that was not what I was trying to get across to you.

I found a little about the GN40, and it appears that a recent EeePC will have/has it, and it will be better. Why didn't you bring it up earlier?

"Via competitor which is all..." I don't quite follow. I don't think I implied that everyone was VIA's competitor, but I guess I could be wrong.

The successors to the NC20 are smaller, and are less likely be used for CPU intensive activities. That's the best explanation I can think of, but I can't say it's correct. My previous argument about Intel's restrictions could also be used here, but I think that one has less merit.
 
I don't have a Search function integrated in my head.

It means Via is not a competitor of any significance. Never has been, and it's not now.

You're implying NC20 is used for more CPU intensive activities? What!? The successors to the NC10 are all 10", the defacto form factor. NC20 uses netbook specs stuff with ONLY a bigger screen, and now you're saying it's for "more intensive applications" (basically saying Via is for more intensive crap than Atom). No.

Your argument on Intel's restriction is becoming invalid since manufacturers are moving past 10" on Atom- Lenovo, ASUS, Acer.
 
the Nano is a good CPU, all it needs a decent integrated GPU.

i quite like the Lenovo S12, which has been rumoured to use the Ion/Nano combination in one SKU, but i don't like the screen. I have some hope that the new Samsung 11.6" netbook might offer a SKU with Nano instead of Atom, as it uses the Ion GPU.
 
One thing the Nano rules in is in security/encryption thanks to its built-in Padlock hardware, which accelerates encrypting and decrypting data. In benchmarks a Nano runs circles around even an i7-based system for these purposes.

This is really a market VIA should focus more on, IMO.
 
I had a motheboard with a VIA chipset.
Once.
Never again.

KT133 was awful, KT133A was fine, same story with KT266. I had a K7 mainboard with a VIA chipset once too, but Asus had screwed up the implementation (awful memory support and such), so that wasn't really VIA's fault.

I still maintain that nForce chipsets in general are worse than VIA ones ;)
 
KT133 was awful, KT133A was fine, same story with KT266. I had a K7 mainboard with a VIA chipset once too, but Asus had screwed up the implementation (awful memory support and such), so that wasn't really VIA's fault.

I still maintain that nForce chipsets in general are worse than VIA ones ;)

Like comparing plauge and cholera to decide which is better ;)
 
Like comparing plauge and cholera to decide which is better ;)

Meh, nVidia so far has managed to make its chipsets corrupt network data, nuke HDDs if you dared to use its own storage driver, implement super-flaky NICs, introduce random incompatibilities with PCI(e) devices and produce a few super unstable chipsets which would make even VIA cringe in horror.

I'm at a loss trying to come up with equally spectacular failures for VIA. As far as I remember their revisions of not-so-great chipsets usually were stable, reliable chipsets. Perhaps not too rich on features, but nothing you'd want to run away from in terror. Heck, even SiS got it right a few times :)
 
Meh, nVidia so far has managed to make its chipsets corrupt network data, nuke HDDs if you dared to use its own storage driver, implement super-flaky NICs, introduce random incompatibilities with PCI(e) devices and produce a few super unstable chipsets which would make even VIA cringe in horror.

I'm at a loss trying to come up with equally spectacular failures for VIA. As far as I remember their revisions of not-so-great chipsets usually were stable, reliable chipsets. Perhaps not too rich on features, but nothing you'd want to run away from in terror. Heck, even SiS got it right a few times :)

Via chipset can have crappy drivers (Via 4in1 anyone) that make your PC a random BSOD feast...så I have no clue to what stabilty you are referring too? :p

This happend to the only 2 VIA chipset PC's i have touched...and old AMD K6-II rig I had years back, and a newer AMD rig (around the P4 time) a friend of mine bought...never, never again.
 
Via chipset can have crappy drivers (Via 4in1 anyone) that make your PC a random BSOD feast...så I have no clue to what stabilty you are referring too? :p

This happend to the only 2 VIA chipset PC's i have touched...and old AMD K6-II rig I had years back, and a newer AMD rig (around the P4 time) a friend of mine bought...never, never again.

Your experiences have been worse than for me and most people, then :) People tolerated the nForce chipsets because they provided more features than the VIA ones, but even today the former is still a risky choice. Some people say that with the NF4 chipset things really went downhill. I say it already started with NF2, having used it for a while.

Anyway, this is rapidly going off-topic ^_^
 
Back
Top