Print 26 comment(s) - last by hstewarth.. on Jun 29 at 1:01 AM

9W dual-core and 2.33GHz Yonah processors hit the streets

Despite the Woodcrest Xeon processor announced yesterday, this week Intel is expected to start shipping two new Core Duo processors.

The new Core Duo T2700 is a 2.33GHz dual-core 65nm Yonah-based CPU, specifically targeted for high end notebooks and desktop replacement (DTR) devices.  The processor is already shipping at some retail outlets, and should start showing up in high-end notebooks very soon.  The previous high end model, the 2.16GHz T2600, was reduced to $423 on June 4th, but neither the T2600 nor T2700 will receive another discount until the Merom launch later this year.  The T2700 will sell for $637 in quantities of 1,000.

Furthermore, Intel is also discretely rolling out its Core Duo U2500 ultra-low voltage (ULV) CPU.   The U2500 is currently the only dual-core ULV product in Intel's arsenal until the 1.06GHz U7500 Merom processor launches with Santa Rosa in Q2'07.  The U2500 is a 1.2GHz Yonah processor with 2MB L2 cache and a 533MHz FSB.  The U2500 recently received some attention on DailyTech as it is the only x86 dual-core processor to ship with a 9W maximum TDP envelope.  The CPU consumes less than 1W during normal operation.  The U2500 will sell for $289 per chip in quantities of 1,000.

Intel recently announced it would spin off its XScale ARM CPU series; a processor typically dedicated to extremely low voltage applications like cell phones and PDAs.  With single-Watt dual-core processors now part in Intel's processor lineup, it may be that the company is considering x86 for these devices.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

9 Watts!!
By Chadder007 on 6/27/2006 2:31:34 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, im impressed. Only 9 watts of power out of a good 1.2 ghz processor.

RE: 9 Watts!!
By MercenaryForHire on 6/27/2006 2:45:05 PM , Rating: 2
Indeed. I can see these being very popular with the HTPC crowd ... or maybe even the overclockers if these things can bump to 800FSB like the 805D's.

Any indication of pricing for these units, even in tray quantity?

- M4H

RE: 9 Watts!!
By KristopherKubicki on 6/27/2006 2:49:57 PM , Rating: 2
Pricing will be $289 in quantities of 1000

RE: 9 Watts!!
By MercenaryForHire on 6/27/2006 2:55:21 PM , Rating: 1
Okay, maybe not that popular then. :)

Just read from the other link in the article that this is a BGA (soldered-on) processor. Hopefully that's not still the case, otherwise that puts a major dent in any roll-your-own systems.

- M4H

RE: 9 Watts!!
By KristopherKubicki on 6/27/2006 2:57:20 PM , Rating: 2
Although Intel's documentation says its BGA, it looks like there might be a socketed version too

RE: 9 Watts!!
By Samus on 6/27/2006 4:26:24 PM , Rating: 2
Now that Intel (and partly AMD) have unbelievably energy efficient CPU's, the rest of the industry needs to catch up.

Hard drives has dropped in power consumption for as little as 3 watts (1.8") and flash memory has always been faily low voltage/low wattage, but LCD screens and inefficient power supplies (some as poor as 60% efficiency) need to catch up.

After all, the LCD still consumes 60% of the power in a modern notebook.

RE: 9 Watts!!
By del on 6/27/2006 7:09:11 PM , Rating: 2
Not to mention the video card industry produces very power-hungry cards, although power consumption was reduced over the GeForce 6800 Ultra with the advent of the GeForce 7800 GTX.

RE: 9 Watts!!
By plewis00 on 6/27/2006 7:47:21 PM , Rating: 2
The advent of LED-lit LCDs and other technologies should fix that. For some reason Sony appears to be one of the only ones who use LED-lit displays in their notebooks, and I know it has its problems, like (in Sonys case) too thin lids put extra pressure on the LCD and it has cracked (it can be made thicker, that is not an issue) and also the irregular lighting pattern across the base, but I could make do with that for better battery life and I'm sure many others could too.

I still don't see what's wrong with OLED either, 5,000 hours from the shortest colour (blue isn't it?) is still over 200 days 24/7 which isn't realistic.

RE: 9 Watts!!
By KristopherKubicki on 6/28/2006 3:12:53 AM , Rating: 2
I still don't see what's wrong with OLED either, 5,000 hours from the shortest colour (blue isn't it?) is still over 200 days 24/7 which isn't realistic.

I am a huge OLED supporter after seeing a few of the facilities in Taiwan. The problems with discoloration are pretty much taken care of now, now its just a matter of mass producing on the large scale. OLED is more chemical manufacturing than substrate manufacturing, and most of the companies that were really good at making glass-based products have to start at square one to make OLEDs. OLEDs use ridiculously less power than any LCD by the way.

LED-LCD is a good stepping stone in the meantime, however.

RE: 9 Watts!!
By PedroDaGr8 on 6/28/2006 2:52:12 PM , Rating: 2
To correct you, red is the worst color. It results in a green tinging of the screen. The half-life for red still lage by about half behind blue and between 10 and 100x behind green at last check. I know this because I used to do research on OLED materials specifically polyasymrtically substituted penacenes, as efficient stable red emitters.

RE: 9 Watts!!
By sxr7171 on 6/27/2006 3:32:18 PM , Rating: 2
Good processor but what's with Intel waiting a year for the Merom version which will be clocked slower. Architecture improvemetns aside even ultraportable users want to see improvements in performance over the years. It seems that ULV processors are simply stagnant or marginally improving in terms of performance.

I'm not even saying that they shouldn't release a 1.06GHz ULV but what about a 1.2GHz and maybe a 1.4GHz ULV next year? I guess they want improvements in ULV processor performance to be only driven by jumps in architecture improvements.

RE: 9 Watts!!
By Eris23007 on 6/27/2006 4:08:02 PM , Rating: 2
Apparently you haven't noticed that they went from 15W in ULV Dothan down to 9W in ULV Yonah. I would wager that the ULV Merom will be even lower - maybe 6W or less? Then a 1.06GHz dual-core Merom sure looks interesting for mobile apps *drooooool*.

Just imagine - a 5 or 6W 1.06GHz dual-core Merom powering then nex-gen Treos (or something along those lines anyway). Yummy!

... just make it as thin as the Moto Q and I'll buy it...

RE: 9 Watts!!
By Phynaz on 6/27/2006 4:44:50 PM , Rating: 2
An old roadmap did show a 5W Merom.

RE: 9 Watts!!
By KristopherKubicki on 6/27/2006 4:47:08 PM , Rating: 2
The current roadmap has 5.5W single-core Yonahs.

RE: 9 Watts!!
By sxr7171 on 6/27/2006 10:42:19 PM , Rating: 2
Sure, but why not a 9W 1.3GHz or so Merom for Ultraportables and maybe the 1.06 for PDAs? Unless the LV is supposed to take that role.

RE: 9 Watts!!
By psychobriggsy on 6/28/2006 6:59:35 AM , Rating: 2
"ust imagine - a 5 or 6W 1.06GHz dual-core Merom powering then nex-gen Treos (or something along those lines anyway). Yummy! "

Ugh, I hope not. I don't want a phone or PDA that runs out of juice after a few hours (the batteries inside aren't massive capacity). These are devices that run on processors currently that are 1/10th that power consumption (and people still complain about battery life being too short), often 1/100th in power saving modes. It's annoying now that a Dell Axim will lose all its juice after a few days, I remember my old Palm IIIc lasting for weeks without a recharge.

Maybe in 2010, or 2012, a 1GHz dual-core Merom derivative on 32nm will be a more suitable processor for what you want. For now though, these processors will make nice tablet PC processors (whatever Intel or Microsoft want to call this year's tablet PC failure anyway).

RE: 9 Watts!!
By Oscarine on 6/28/2006 10:55:41 AM , Rating: 2
Treo batteries aren't exactly tiny, 1700-1800? mAH, I've seen laptop batteries as low as 2100.

Wonder? Hardly...
By Hare on 6/27/2006 5:41:53 PM , Rating: 2
What do you people think happens when you seriously underclock and undervolt a normal Core Duo processor? The answer is ultra low voltage version. My current pentium m740 can easily be undervolted to "ultra low voltage" wattage. Same thing with ultra low voltage core duo.

RE: Wonder? Hardly...
By PT2006 on 6/27/2006 6:08:11 PM , Rating: 1
So when can I buy a Samsung UMPC with Hare Undervolted Underclocked Pentium M?

Don't answer that.

RE: Wonder? Hardly...
By Hare on 6/28/2006 3:02:56 AM , Rating: 2
Never? My point was that it's not that big a deal. People are going "uuh, aaaaah, what a wonder of modern high tech". My point was just to take it down a notch... Same core duo, just selected chips that pass the low voltage tests (I bet 50% of the chips can achieve the same TDP/power consumption).

RE: Wonder? Hardly...
By Wahsapa on 6/27/2006 8:21:17 PM , Rating: 2
its not the same as buying an intel binned chip

also it might not stay in the same heat envelope

RE: Wonder? Hardly...
By smilingcrow on 6/28/2006 10:56:18 AM , Rating: 2
The other advantage of under-volting a standard voltage Yonah is that you will likely have more motherboards that support it, as at least some of the Pentium M motherboards didn’t support any of the LV or ULV versions and this may have been true across the board. The same is likely to occur for Core Duo and this is even assuming that the ULV Core Duo will be available in a S479 packaging, which hasn’t been confirmed yet and seems unlikely.

I used CrystalCPUID to under-volt & under-clock a T2300 and estimate that it consumed ~8W @ 1.167 GHz (multi = 7), 1.004V, 667 FSB. Maybe a bad chip will only go as low as 10-11W, but is it worth paying the extra $80 on the odd chance of saving a couple of watts!

When estimating a TDP remember that the T2700 is 2.33 GHz at a max voltage of 1.4V and is rated at 31W. Wattage scales fairly linearly with clock speed and is proportional to the square of the voltage. This isn’t 100% accurate but close enough.

You can also use CrystalCPUID in laptops to in effect change a standard Core Duo to an ULV version and you get to choose your own max multiplier. I did this with an Inspiron 6400 when making the above measurements; the power consumption of the laptop with both cores on full load dropped from 43W to 27W when I used the above settings.

AFAIK, the big deal about these chips is that they come in a more compact packaging which is useful in smaller laptops. Sure they bin them, but I don’t think they have any problems getting enough parts; Intel’s mobile parts are that good.

By muziqaz on 6/27/2006 2:20:01 PM , Rating: 2
Sweet j!!!
it would be nice to see some benchies and real power consumption.
Also those boxes look very nice :)

RE: 1W???
By del on 6/27/2006 7:12:25 PM , Rating: 2
hehe =)

Yeah, Intel always has the best packaging. ;)
9 W holy schnikeys! I can't wait till Core 2 Duo is released for laptops =)

By hstewarth on 6/29/2006 1:01:12 AM , Rating: 2
Does a 9V CPU mean one day we will have a PC base phone or even a watch one day. If they could make it small enough, maybe one this will happen.

that is truely amazing...
By Samus on 6/27/06, Rating: 0
"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes
Related Articles
Intel's "Woodcrest" to Launch Monday
June 23, 2006, 1:42 PM
Intel's Dual-Core 9W "Yonah"
May 30, 2006, 2:03 PM
Intel 2006 Mobile CPU Roadmap Update
May 26, 2006, 4:59 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki