VIA

They have their niche
X86 at those sizes is pretty neat

>>52541473
That looks cool

Is it disappointing?

>>52541507
Possibly.

>>52541500
It is, but I can't get any of their products in Australia.

I'd love one of these, came out last year iirc?

http://www.viatech.com/en/boards/pico-itx/epia-e900/

>>52541507
Form factor is amazing, performance is meh.

>>52541473
couldn't come anywhere close to fighting Intel or AMD on performance, and their chipsets were junk. (I remember having to install certain drivers in a certain order or else everything would fuck up back in the Apollo Pro and KT133 days)

>>52541897
How good would it be for a low use/consumption x86 server?

Should I go atom?

>>52542124
If you could get VIA I'd say go for it just for the sake of having a VIA before they disappear. Performance should be fine, but if you want Intel, Good luck finding an atom so small.

I remember waiting for ages for the VT8251 SB which never came.

>>52541507
very

Seems way to expensive for an SBC, especially since you need to buy extra extension boards to make full use of it.

You could get a VIA but only if you can get it for around 20 AUS. The performance isn't all that good. It can run Winblows so hey.
>>52542223
This.

>>52541473
They rehashed the same processor over and over while Intel stole an unsalable lead in performance, they tried to undercut them but found that the market share wasn't good enough then tried to cram more chips onto one die to get the core count up to see if they could get a foot hold in the server market but that's a very conservative market and intel has always been king despite the cost because of the reputation of bullet proof reliability. Finally they gave up and accepted there position as also rans and started to make niche products to stay afloat.

>>52542149
There are several small Atom SBCs out there.

>>52542256
A lot of them. Very cheap as well.

>>52542149
Supermicro makes a few small atom SOC.

This one has 16 sata 3 ports:
http://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/Atom/X10/A1SA7-2750F.cfm

>>52542158
And it never will

>>52542266
This is actually pretty good.

>>52542165
Wow, they ask 300$ for a 40nm 4core @ 1.4ghz shit performance that runs on a low power of 45w

Jesus christ what is this, 2005?

>>52542158
>VT8251
Wasn't that code named Zen?

>>52541473
Their Isiah II looked promising, but it never came did it?

>>52541971

4in1Driver pack nigga

>>52542294
Yea it really did.

>>52542294
I still don't understand why to this day it was never released http://www.extremetech.com/computing/185888-vias-new-isaiah-x86arm-hybrid-cpu-outperforms-intel-in-benchmarks-but-will-it-ever-come-to-market

>>52542363
Might have had issues with energy consumption. It barely beat the athlon 5350, so if it was a 40w or higher chip it would have been embarrassing.

>>52542281
Fuck if I knew, but it was to address the main flaw of the VT8237 SB, that is stick it onto something faster than legacy PCI.