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

Slow Start?
By Questar on 2/15/2006 11:31:44 AM , Rating: 2
How the hell is launching six months early a slow start?!?




RE: Slow Start?
By NFS4 on 2/15/2006 11:50:22 AM , Rating: 2
Have you seen any large volume shipments of Core Solo or Core Duo based notebooks?


RE: Slow Start?
By Questar on 2/15/2006 4:01:20 PM , Rating: 2
Since I haven't looked, no.


RE: Slow Start?
By ShapeGSX on 2/15/2006 8:46:29 PM , Rating: 2
Intel already shipped over a million Yonah processors as of a couple weeks ago.


RE: Slow Start?
By jilchev on 2/16/2006 4:31:44 AM , Rating: 2
I'm preaty sure that Dell gets orders for E1705 from Day One (9.Jan) and ships in their usual build time frame...
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx...

So Core Duo is definetly available thru BIG providers not from Apple and "Botique" once only!


RE: Slow Start?
By JackPack on 2/15/2006 9:59:58 PM , Rating: 2
It isn't a slow start.

It's obvious Brandon Hill hasn't read this:
http://news.com.com/Intels+Core+Duo+health+causes+...


RE: Slow Start?
By NFS4 on 2/16/2006 12:00:56 AM , Rating: 2
Looks like that link solidifies the "slow start." Only small vendors are getting out any product...and small amounts of product at that. The big guys are still looking volume:

quote:
Intel formally unveiled the new Core Duo processor at the Consumer Electronics Show earlier this month. Acer and Sony have started shipping a few notebooks that feature the dual-core processor, formerly known by its Yonah code name. [b]But Gateway, Hewlett-Packard, Apple Computer, Lenovo and Dell are still waiting to release their Core Duo notebooks, even though they have announced the specifications and pricing.[/b]


RE: Slow Start?
By JackPack on 2/16/2006 1:28:18 AM , Rating: 2
I guess you have comprehension problems if you still think Intel is to blame for the "slow start" of Core Duo products.

The article clearly states that Core Duo was ahead of schedule. It was the larger companies such as Dell with longer EVT/DVT/PVT cycles which could not adapt to the tightened schedule. Yonah was originally targeted for March/April.

Combine that with the fact Intel shipped 1M Yonah processors in the first three weeks after intro. Apple also had Yonah iMac desktops ready on day-one. If Intel and Apple were on their "honeymoon" as so many suggested, Apple would have had Core Duo MacBooks on day-one as well. Clearly, that was not the case. Intel had the processors ready -- it was a first-come-first-serve arrangement. Apple recycled the iMac design and hence could ship first. Their notebook design, like Dell, HP and Gateway, had to wait until February since they were caught off guard by Intel's 65nm success.


RE: Slow Start?
By Knish on 2/16/2006 4:31:10 AM , Rating: 2
"It's not microsoft's fault XBox 360 is shipping in low volume, it's the people who manufacturer xbox 360"

Please. give me a break. I heard of core duo 2 months ago. Where can you buy a core duo?

http://froogle.google.com/froogle?q=core+duo+lenov...

Go ahead, click all of those links. I tried. Not a single notebook in stock.


RE: Slow Start?
By JackPack on 2/16/2006 6:10:33 AM , Rating: 2
Nice strawman.

http://www.compusa.com/products/products.asp?in_di...

Guess you've never heard of Dell, Toshiba, or Sony either.

I'm surprised you have Internet access in that cave of yours.


RE: Slow Start?
By ShapeGSX on 2/16/2006 7:10:02 AM , Rating: 2
You forgot to read the rest of that article (it was from Jan 27th):
"Comparable notebooks from Dell and Gateway won't ship until the first week of February, based on those companies' Web sites, while Apple's MacBook Pro won't appear in Apple stores until the second week of February, according to a sales representative at the company's San Francisco store. HP is bringing up the rear, with its Core Duo notebook not scheduled to ship until Feb. 24."

So out of those, only hp isn't shipping yet.


RE: Slow Start?
By Knish on 2/16/2006 4:14:07 PM , Rating: 2
Or lenovo. See above


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!!!!


While not exactly a rush...
By A5 on 2/15/2006 12:15:56 PM , Rating: 2
At least it's making the prices fall on Pentium M notebooks - just got a Thinkpad R51e w/ Pentium M 740 for $700.




RE: While not exactly a rush...
By seraph47 on 2/15/2006 1:33:20 PM , Rating: 2
...hmm, more info plz :P


RE: While not exactly a rush...
By A5 on 2/15/2006 4:18:37 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.costcentral.com/proddetail/Lenovo_Think...

$767 - $75MIR = $692 w/ free shipping.


Drat...Q4
By kelmon on 2/15/2006 12:32:59 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I guess Intel needs to get a reasonable amount of mileage from Yonah but I was hoping that Merom would be released in Q3 rather than Q4. Looks like I'll be waiting for around Christmas for a new laptop, possibly 2007 if Apple can't get them out in the wild soon enough.




RE: Drat...Q4
By stephenbrooks on 2/15/2006 3:47:30 PM , Rating: 2
Heh well if you look at the bar chart there's a REALLY THIN bar corresponding to Merom in 2006 Q3. So I guess that means a few lucky people might get them in that quarter and the rest will be stuck in back orders or something.


Well
By Griswold on 2/15/2006 3:41:02 PM , Rating: 2
Where is the desktop roadmap with release dates etc?




RE: Well
By Questar on 2/15/2006 4:02:35 PM , Rating: 2
Right side of my desk, middle drawer.


Hmmm..
By Doormat on 2/15/2006 12:44:44 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if those Celeron M chips released on 4/16 will find their way into Mac iBooks shortly thereafter.




"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki











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