The Foxconn AT-5570 is a small form-factor desktop computer with a low power AMD C-70 processor and Radeon HD 7290 graphics. First introduced a few months ago, the AT-5570 is is now available for purchase in the US.
Newegg is selling a barebones model (without memory, storage, or an operating system) for $250.
While that might seem like a high price for a low power computer that’s useless unless you spend money to equip it with storage and RAM, what you get is a tiny desktop that can run Windows, Linux, or other operating systems. It also has a fanless design, which means that if you use a solid state disk instead of a hard drive, there won’t be any moving parts to make any noise at all.
The Foxconn AT-5570 case measures 7.5″ x 5.3″ x 1.5 and features 2 USB 3.0 ports, 4 USB 2.0 ports DVI and HDMI ports, an audio jack, a memory card reader, and Gigabyte Ethernet.
It supports up to 8GB of DDR3 memory and has a SATA 3.0Gb/s port for a hard drive or solid state disk.
The AMD C-70 chip is a low-power, dual-core x86 processor that’s most commonly used for inexpensive laptops. It’s about as powerful as an Intel Atom chip, but offers higher-performance graphics capabilities.
via Fanless Tech
My first negative message has been deleted. If you post a comment make sure it stays on the board. Almost done with… yeah I hope you fail for false rep.
I honestly have no idea what you’re talking about.
once more, who’d buy this but a fool. I might unsubscribe.
You do realize this article is 9 months old, right?
Why did you stick this Jan ad in with today’s news? who’d buy this rotten deal?
for 250, I’d rather go for Intel’s NUC. Granted this is fanless, but the performance differential of the NUC is way more enough to make up for it. No idea how much control the bios gives you on the NUC, but if they allow you to underclock and undervolt, the NUC might be able to get away with the fan never turning on and still outperform the C-70
Good enough is good enough. That one system can “outperform” another is academic unless you actually need it. Intel just don’t seem to get that most people care more about practical features like silent-running operation than theoretical performance. If you need a beast with a fan, then get one, but don’t just run your mouth about performance most people will never need.
I’m not sure where you’re coming from, but like I said, if they allow underclocking, the Intel CPU in the NUC can be set to run slow enough that it doesn’t need the fan, while still beating the C-70 in performance, for the same price
And “good enough” is relative. Good enough is ALWAYS compared to cost. and “performance most people will never need” is just nonsense, because “need” is also based off price.
It’s pretty easy to prove that you are wrong as well. the C-70 is pretty much on par with the current high end Atom CPUs. Take into account the sales of PCs with Atom CPUs and/or C series cpus, and compare that with the sales of low end computers with i3, and you can see that the Atom/C performance isn’t to the point of “good enough” yet. I have no doubt that it’ll reach that point in a few years, but it just isn’t true right now.
Good enough for purpose — not good enough for anything. I was talking about performance, not cost, as I made clear
with your logic, a single core A9 (or even A7 ) would be more than sufficient.
No you’re not getting it are you? Engage your brain. I didn’t say any requirement can be satisfied by a single A9. I said once you reach a certain point, using more powerful chips has diminishing returns in practical benefits but almost always comes at a cost (money/power/size). What that “certain point” is depends entirely on the *purpose* of the system.
Obviously more power is always better for a gaming rig, since new games are coming out all the time targeting/using cutting edge hardware. Not every system is a gaming rig though. The vast majority of “purposes” change very little over time and require very little power. ARM do about 5 times more business in the micro-controller/embedded world than they do in the mobile/”post-pc” world.
My E-450 blows away all the Atom-based systems I’ve seen so far. According to the benchmarks, the APU’s by AMD smoke the Atoms in most categories. With the APU’s you can play some games too, whereas the Intel HD sucks ballz.
It seems good device for $250 if they offer little bit of memory and storage.
Why is is so much more than similar models with the amd E-350 or E-450?
LUV my E-450! I have heard the cpu’s after the E-450 kind of sucked.. Not sure how/if this one will be good/bad. Prolly more because it is BRAND NEW, and they wanna sell thru their older models first.
Looks quite nice. Towards the end of its life, the dual-core Atom/ION predecessor to this was being blown out for about £130 (US$200) including RAM, hard disk, clip-on DVD-RW and wireless deskset. Would be very tempting if this went the same way!
that’s a pretty nice price.
Comments are closed.