Print 43 comment(s) - last by Anonymous Frea.. on Sep 26 at 4:34 PM

Single-core for the value minded

DailyTech has received Intel roadmaps that outline Intel’s value desktop products. New to Intel’s value desktop lineup will be Conroe-L based processors. Unlike Intel’s Core 2 Duo Conroe products, the new Conroe-L processors will not carry the Core nomenclature. Instead Intel is resuscitating the Pentium and Celeron brands for Conroe-L based products.

Intel Conroe-L Pentium
E1060 1.80GHz 800MHz 1MB
E1040 1.60GHz 800MHz 1MB
E1020 1.40GHz 800MHz 1MB

The Pentium Conroe-L lineup will carry the E1000 series processor number. Three Pentium E1000 models will be available initially. These models include the Pentium E1060, E1040 and E1020 clocked at 1.80, 1.60 and 1.40 GHz respectively. All Pentium E1000 series processors will have an 800 MHz front-side bus with 1MB of L2 cache. Intel Enhanced Memory 64 Technology and Execute Disable Bit are the only technologies featured on Pentium E1000 processors. Intel Virtualization, HyperThreading and Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology are not supported.

Not much is known about the Conroe-L Celeron aside from it having a 400 number sequence. Expect the Celeron 400 series to be slightly crippled when compared to the Pentium E1000 series. DailyTech speculates Conroe-L Celeron 400 series processors will have 512KB of L2 cache and operate on a 533 MHz front-side bus to not overlap with the Pentium E1000 series.

Pricing and availability of Pentium E1000 and Celeron 400 series processors is unknown at the moment.

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: What for?
By ZmaxDP on 9/21/2006 1:30:22 PM , Rating: 5
Dear dgingeri,

Though I agree that one line comments like "Got the benches?" Aren't particularly useful and waste space on the forums, I also think that rabid responses are equally (if not more) wasteful.

Consider this, our friend Phynaz may have been trying to get across (albeit poorly done) that there are no benchies and that any attempts to pre-determine the likely performance of the parts or their price is merely speculation.

Also consider that there have been many reversals of long true "facts" in the industry these last few months. Between MAC going Intel, Dell selling AMD, AMD buying ATI, and Intel outperforming AMD on performance per clock AND per watt, one might realize that a little caution might be waranted in making speculations about how something that no one has ever seen will perform and cost. Want another topsy-turvy? Xeon processors clocked faster than Conroe processors costing less.

Don't get me wrong, the past is a useful tool for predicting the future, but to imply that because you know the past you KNOW the future is far more foolish than asking for benches of an un-released product.

Last, these are likely to be slated for Laptops and HTPC's, not your gaming desktop. As such the HIGHLY superior thermal and power performance of the Core 2 architecture is going to make your comparison a but invalid. You'd have to get a much slower AMD chip to meet the same power envelope. So, even if the 1.4 is priced like a 2.0 AMD chip, you could get the 2.0 and 3 hours of battery life, or a 1.4 Intel and get 5. Which would you chose? Depends on your needs. My guess is that the person that needs performance won't even be considering these processors and so Intel will win this sector most of the time once they release these, at least until AMD comes out with their answer for it.

Oh, one more thing, if you're going to accuse someone of waving their stupidity as a flag, you might try to make sure yours isn't fluttering about somewhere as well.

RE: What for?
By Phynaz on 9/21/2006 1:39:59 PM , Rating: 2
albeit poorly done

Yes, this is true. In the future I will explain my position better.

I appreciate your response.

Hopefully people will realize a response such as yours will cause people to think and consider what is written. A response such as the one from dgingeri results in immediate dismissal.

Thanks again,

RE: What for?
By dgingeri on 9/21/06, Rating: -1
RE: What for?
By Eris23007 on 9/21/2006 10:30:39 PM , Rating: 2
In my experience, it takes smacking someone upside the head to get them to see sense about 80% of the time, so I usually start there.

Whereas in my experience "smacking someone upside the head to get them to see sense" inevitably has an outcome diametrically opposed to the desired one.

Fascinating how our experiences could be so wildly out of sync.

/resists urge to throw in smarmy comments or name-calling

"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner
Related Articles
Here Comes "Conroe"
July 13, 2006, 12:47 PM

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