backtop


Print 30 comment(s) - last by Knish.. on Feb 16 at 4:14 PM

Pricing and release dates for upcoming Intel products revealed

Intel's Yonah hasn't gotten quite the launch that many would have like to have seen. Core Solo and Duo based PC notebooks are few and far between these days. Apple and the smaller boutique PC notebook manufacturers have been able to launch products based on Yonah, but the heavy hitters like Dell are still lagging behind a bit. In the mean time, Intel's mobile processor roadmap is abuzz with activity. Intel will launch Core Solo Ultra Low Voltage processors on April 23rd. At that time, 1.06GHz and 1.2GHz models will be available, with a 1.06GHz ultra low voltage Core Duo U1400 to join the family Q3'06. 

An Intel Core Duo T2700 will replace the T2600 at the top of the Yonah processor family. The T2700 will debut in Q3 with a clock speed of 2.33GHz and a price of $640. The T2700 will have a short reign at the top of  Core Duo product range. Q4 will see the launch of Merom. Merom launch at speeds ranging from 1.83GHz to 2.33GHz and will feature EMT64 support -- more than a year after AMD brought Turion64 to the mobile sector.  Granted, I still have yet to see a laptop with more than 4GB of memory anyway.

Intel Mobile Performance Roadmap
Processor Brand Processor No. Core Name Clock Speed/FSB Cache Launch Date Price @ Launch
Merom Processor T7600 Merom 2.33GHz / 667MHz 4MB Q4'06 $637 (???)
Merom Processor T7400 Merom 2.16GHz / 667MHz 4MB Q4'06 $423 (???)
Merom Processor T7200 Merom 2.0GHz / 667MHz 4MB Q4'06 $294 (???)
Merom Processor T5600 Merom 1.83GHz / 667MHz 2MB Q4'06 $241 (???)
Intel Core Duo T2700 Yonah 2.33GHz / 667MHz 2MB Q3'06 $637 (???)
Intel Core Duo T2600 Yonah 2.16GHz / 667MHz 2MB Now
Intel Core Duo T2300E Yonah 1.66GHz / 667MHz 2MB Q2'06 $209 (05/28)
Intel Core Solo T1400 Yonah 1.83GHz / 667MHz 2MB Q2'06 $209 (05/28)
Intel Core Duo LV L2400 Yonah 1.66GHz / 667MHz 2MB Now
Intel Core Duo LV L2300 Yonah 1.50GHz / 667MHz 2MB Now
Intel Core Duo ULV U2500 Yonah 1.06GHz / 533MHz 2MB Q3'06 $289 (???)
Intel Core Solo ULV U1400 Yonah 1.20GHz / 533MHz 2MB Q2'06 $262 (04/16)
Intel Core Solo ULV U1300 Yonah 1.06MHz / 533MHz 2MB Q2'06 $241 (04/16)

Yonah based Celeron processors are on the way for the second quarter ranging in speed from 1.46GHz to 1.73GHz. The chips will still feature 1MB of L2 cache and will come will feature a 533MHz FSB. 

Intel Mobile Value Roadmap
Processor Brand Processor No. Core Name Clock Speed/FSB Cache Price @ Launch
Intel Celeron M 430 Yonah 1.73GHz/533MHz 1MB $134 (04/16)
Intel Celeron M 420 Yonah 1.60GHz/533MHz 1MB $107 (04/16)
Intel Celeron M 410 Yonah 1.46GHz/533MHz 1MB $86 (05/28)
Intel Celeron M ULV 423 Yonah 1.06GHz/533MHz 1MB $161 (04/16)

Intel expects to ramp up the production of dual-core mobile processors thoughout 2006 (see image, right). In Q1 of 2006, dual core processors are expected to make up just over 25% of Intel's total mobile processor shipments. By Q4, that product mix will do a complete 180 with dual core processors making up just over 80% of Intel's total mobile processor shipments.



Comments     Threshold


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

That's what i call stupid comment!
By MrKaz on 2/15/2006 12:22:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Merom launch at speeds ranging from 1.83GHz to 2.33GHz and will feature EMT64 support -- more than a year after AMD brought Turion64 to the mobile sector. Granted, I still have yet to see a laptop with more than 4GB of memory anyway.


Well it seems that the only thing that EMT64 (AMD64) is all about is to get beyond the 4GB of addressable memory....
Stop making stupid comments like those. EMT64 is more than SSE, SSE2, SSE3...

It is a question of being able to run FUTURE OPERATING SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS (that require 64 bits) EVEN IF THEY ONLY NEED 128MB OF RAM TO WORK!!!!

I have a AMD thunderbird 1.4 Ghz and today doesn’t run some games because it lacks SSE, not because its outdated, or other things. The ONLY problem that Intel mobile platforms is that they lack 64 bits, you say that today is not needed, but what about tomorrow?




By fhornmikey on 2/15/2006 1:29:45 PM , Rating: 2
Given that Microsoft is still planning on releasing Windows Vista in a 32 bit edition, the necessity of 64 bit processing for the immediate future is negligible at best.

Also important to note is that at the current time there is almost zero performance advantage to 64 bit computing as there aren't applications to take advantage of it.

Given the large user installed base of 32 bit processors, it is extremely unlikely that even Microsoft's next OS after Windows Vista will come in a 64 bit only edition.

You're not talking about tommorow, you're talking about 5+ years from now, at which point microprocessor technology will have moved forward to such an extent that the current crop will seem outdated in comparison.

SSE and other likewise instruction sets are FAR more important to support at the current time than 64 bit processing, and to think anything else is to delude yourself.


By Wahsapa on 2/15/2006 1:30:05 PM , Rating: 2
tomarrow? still not needed...


RE: That's what i call stupid comment!
By Questar on 2/15/2006 2:13:17 PM , Rating: 2
64 bits of what?

The only purpose of the 64bit instructions is for addressing memory beyond 4GB. There are no 64bit instructions that do anything beyond that.

EM64T = Extended Memory 64 Technology.
Memory, not data, get it?


RE: That's what i call stupid comment!
By Optimizer on 2/15/2006 5:15:08 PM , Rating: 2
I beg to differ. AMD64 provides a full set of 64 bit instructions, which includes counterparts for your favourite 32 bit operations. By your logic, the only advantage 32 bit computing has over 16 bit computing is that it can adress more memory.


RE: That's what i call stupid comment!
By Questar on 2/15/2006 6:15:01 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, 32bit CPU's added intructions to manipulate data 32bits at a time and added 32bit busses.

The 64 bit extensions have neither.


RE: That's what i call stupid comment!
By Optimizer on 2/16/2006 10:26:55 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, you might want to catch up on your reading...


By Questar on 2/16/2006 11:19:58 AM , Rating: 3
Really?

So, A64 has a 64bit data bus?


More to x64 than memory
By huges84 on 2/15/2006 7:03:35 PM , Rating: 2
Everybody say it with me now:

"There... is... more... to.. AMD64/EM64T.. than... just.. memory"

x86-64 is a retooling of x86 that tweaks it to be more in line with current needs. The real advantage of x86-64 is that it doubles the number of general purpose registers as well as the size of them, meaning they are 4 times as big. It also doubles the number of SSE registers. This was badly needed because other more modern architectures have more registers. For example, 32 bit x86 has 8 registers while the POWER architecture has 32 general purpose registers. That is a huge disadvantage.

Unfortunately, you won't see much difference right now becuase all programs written in 32 bit were compiled to optimize for only 8 registers. Once code starts to be compiled for x86-64 and compilers learn to do the new optimizations, the performance gains will kick in. Also, the x86-64 architecture gets rid of some old, uneeded crap that holds back CPU speeds.

So the sooner there is a critical mass of people running x86-64, the sooner code will be optimized for it and the sooner the real benefits come.

If you want to read more about the advantages of x86-64 then read this:
http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q1/64-bits/index...


RE: More to x64 than memory
By fbrdphreak on 2/16/2006 8:43:34 AM , Rating: 2
Thank you!!!!


"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki