Intel Yonah Dual Core Processor at 2.16GHz: Intel T1600

Post by **Apoptosis** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 5:57 pm

Looks like Intel's upcoming Dual Core mobile processors are coming along just fine. I was just able to use the use the Intel Pentium M T1600 processor on a working platform running Windows XP for a bit.

For those who don't know Intel is changing their numbering system for the mobile desktop line. The T1600 that I was able to use was a 65 nanometer 2.16GHz processor with 2MB of L2 cache and a blisstering 667MHz front side bus with DDR2 533MHz memory. Intel should also have a T1700 processor that will launch at the same time that is running at 2.33GHz with the same FSB and Cache.

Here is a screen shot in Windows of the Intel T1600 in action:

The T1600 Yonah will cost you $637 (£365) when it is first launched. That is the same price as a current Intel Pentium M 780 processor at 2.26GHz with 2MB cache and a 533-MHz bus. Looks like the dual core Pentium M's aren't going to cost more than the current mobile parts.

More to come when I figure it all out!

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:29 am

man that's nice, and I'm not even an Intel fan, lol. Especially considering they're jacking the price up any more for the most current processor as compared with what's out now (still a bit rich for my blood, but it's a good thing to see out of them).

Pongi · Post by **Pongi** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:22 pm

That looks downright sexy. By any chance do you know what kind of socket it's on? Or is that under NDA?

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 1:05 pm

Pongi wrote:That looks downright sexy. By any chance do you know what kind of socket it's on? Or is that under NDA?

As fas as I know It will be on a new socket!
Some are saying it will be called socket mPGA480... Others say it will still be released as 478 and 479 sockets.. the main thing is they are not compatable with current chipsets, so new motherboard etc.
Should be out in FEB next year.... (apop mayby under NDA? I'm not

)

TheInquirer wrote:The Yonah dual core processors will support Vanderpool technology, the i945GM, the i945PM and the i955XM Express chipsets, and Intel's "Golan" Pro Wireless 3945 abg

Anandtech wrote:As we mentioned a few days ago, Yonah will have a new product naming scheme compared to Dothan and Banias, but it will also use an electrically incompatible 479/478 pin socket. Thus, existing 915GM and 855GME motherboards will not work with the new processor.

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 1:48 pm

that sucks, have to replace the mobo to get the newest chip...ugh, I wish Intel wouldn't do this anymore

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 2:20 pm

killswitch83 wrote:that sucks, have to replace the mobo to get the newest chip...ugh, I wish Intel wouldn't do this anymore

I don't blame them, they have cheaper dual core cpu's out now, thier current dothan chips are way better than AMD's mobile cpu's

Yonah has support for DDR2 @ 667FSB and a much improved core over the current dothan... Yohan's FPU performance is supposed to be alot better (usefull for media encoding, SEE3 etc.)

Since it has support for DDR2 at 667MHz, then a new chipset is in-order....the new chipset could have being just an improved version of current design, to allow higher FSB...but Intel seemed to have added support for cool stuff like new WiFi, VT technology and other cool stuff. In other words, It looks like Intel are releasing a real updated chipset, not just another clone of an old chipset to allow new FSB...

What I find interesting is not the standard Yonah, but the so-called extreme version with has a TDP of ~60W - It should turn out to be a beast... Also there is to be a ULV version with uses way less power and only has a fsb of 533MHZ, but should keep batteries happy....

Intel are now at the moment playing catch-up to AMD on the desktop, but next year they have some very nice chips coming out.. AMD will have to watch their backs!

Way to go Intel!

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 2:27 pm

Yeah, I must say I am quite impressed with Intel on their mobile efforts. I guess I can see your point with changing the chipset for better bus speeds. I was really surprised to see how low they can go with the TDP, 14W with the U-series, shoot even the T series is impressive with 25-49W TDP. Ok, for mobile processing, I do have to give it to Intel, but I still believe AMD is the master of the desktop domain...for now anyways. I hope it remains that way, unless Intel can provide better performance and a thermal property rating on their processors better than AMD, then maybe I'll consider.

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 2:54 pm

killswitch83 wrote:Yeah, I must say I am quite impressed with Intel on their mobile efforts. I guess I can see your point with changing the chipset for better bus speeds. I was really surprised to see how low they can go with the TDP, 14W with the U-series, shoot even the T series is impressive with 25-49W TDP. Ok, for mobile processing, I do have to give it to Intel, but I still believe AMD is the master of the desktop domain...for now anyways. I hope it remains that way, unless Intel can provide better performance and a thermal property rating on their processors better than AMD, then maybe I'll consider.

Intel's new 65nm chips are lowering the TDP, but not by enough...at least not for the desktop.
What's very interesting to me, and a threat to AMD is, Intel's new cpu's will have a shorter pipeline. They will be based more on the Dothan chip, with some netburst tech. I'd say AMD are in a good position for the next year with regard to desktops, But we don't know what AMD really has in store. What will socket M2 and DDR2 bring to AMD? By the end of next year we will be seeing 4 cores in a desktop cpu a reality (prob in 2007)

But yeah...Intel's mobile cpu's rock

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:07 pm

I tell you one thing though, I would absolutely LOVE to see AMD come out with a quad-core processor. I know Intel has it in the works, and I can only imagine the performace (and cost!) of this chip. Maybe M2 will pave the way for AMD's implementation of quad-core? I hope so....

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:29 pm

M2 will just allow AMD to communicate with the ram/pcie etc. better and more power.. that sort of thing..
Intel are ahead of AMD in 65nm and lower tech... but AMD have got some new enquipment recently to allow them to start making chips at 65nm and lower....they also opened their new FAB, which will allow more production...

on a side note AMD are in partnership with a company called Spansion, who are the major company behind flash ram, they have a tech process called "mirrorbit" which allows for 2mbit and higher speeds.... This is a big plus for AMD as a company with revenue and such...their desktop cpu are doing well and will do for at least the next year.. so I see AMD in a real position for the first time ever to really put Intel under presure, hopefully in 2007..... (Remember Intel are gigantic..they make everything, and have stock in everything)

Competition is always good for us the consumer, I don't care if I use AMD or Intel...I go for what ever is better for my needs!

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:40 pm

I'll second that one....here's my basic needs/requirements for a good processor:

-good overclocker
-uses relatively little voltage
-stays cool even under a massive OC
-can perform well on games, editing apps, folding (which I plan on doing after my rig is built)
-and most importantly, it's got to be light on my wallet considering the performance

I feel that's pretty well everyone's wants, with a few additions/edits maybe. I remember seeing something about AMD and Spansion partnering together...think they might have a hand in making BIOS chips for AMD-based mobos? All I know is overall I am liking what I see out of processor and mobo technology that's forthcoming.

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:52 pm

Spansion are not in the Bios market...AMI etc. have that market.
They make the chips that go into usb sticks, handheld devices etc. Ecept they make high-capacity and high-speed chips, which no-one else does @ the moment... This market has the most expansion at the moment too... (the current capacity is too small)

All this will allow AMD to earn more revenue, thus more money spent on research, manufactring equipment etc. (shareholders will only allow a company to spend money if they feel safe!)

We all want what you mentioned...It just takes time...hopefully not too long... lol
(this reminds me of the tortiose and the snail......lol)

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:56 pm

I see....adding fuel to AMD's fire. That can speed things up significantly on the R&D side for sure. Gotta excuse me today, lol, brain is fried from homework and Cisco "assessment", otherwise known as the Iraqi Death March

Post by **dicecca112** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:04 pm

kenc51 those are not intels new 65nm chips as I see it. It is just a die shrink of the current that we have now. Dothan @ 65nm = Yonah, Smithfield @ 65nm = Dempsey. So to me the real 65nm chips are the Memrom based chips ie Conroe. Which it looks like is gonna contain Intels version of an Onboard Memory Controller and HTT.

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:06 pm

killswitch83 wrote:I see....adding fuel to AMD's fire. That can speed things up significantly on the R&D side for sure. Gotta excuse me today, lol, brain is fried from homework and Cisco "assessment", otherwise known as the Iraqi Death March

excuse me too...It was was my birthday last friday(27) and I've being on a "bender" for the last few days...I got out of bed @ 6pm today, and had a glass of Jack Daniel's for breakfast... LOL (no work till Wednesday, bank hol weekend)

:side-note: --> I should get my new 7800GTX on Tues/Wed

(Gigabyte - â‚¬480 from a local shop - cheaper than online! - If your from Ireland!)
That's when I H2O cool the 4400+!!! (hoping for 2.7GHz anything more is a bonus)

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:09 pm

dicecca112 wrote:kenc51 those are not intels new 65nm chips as I see it. It is just a die shrink of the current that we have now. Dothan @ 65nm = Yonah, Smithfield @ 65nm = Dempsey. So to me the real 65nm chips are the Memrom based chips ie Conroe. Which it looks like is gonna contain Intels version of an Onboard Memory Controller and HTT.

I know but the lower TDP is "getting there"

There newer chips "look great".....Until we see AMD and Intels new chips...????
My point was AMD are in a better position than ever....

Intel will always have the upperhand when $$$ comes into play

killswitch83 · Post by **killswitch83** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:13 pm

Jack for breakfast? Damn man, now you're beginning to sound like me, rofl. Hell, I got bent on my 22nd a few months ago, so I can't say anything, lol

Post by **dicecca112** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:17 pm

kenc51 wrote:
dicecca112 wrote:kenc51 those are not intels new 65nm chips as I see it. It is just a die shrink of the current that we have now. Dothan @ 65nm = Yonah, Smithfield @ 65nm = Dempsey. So to me the real 65nm chips are the Memrom based chips ie Conroe. Which it looks like is gonna contain Intels version of an Onboard Memory Controller and HTT.
I know but the lower TDP is "getting there"

There newer chips "look great".....Until we see AMD and Intels new chips...????
My point was AMD are in a better position than ever....

Intel will always have the upperhand when $$$ comes into play

Oh absolutely, I was more or less agreeing, although it didn't really come across that way.

I think if they can get Memrom to Yonah power levels, throw a memory controller on it, and up the FSB and Bandwidth on these chips, and then if the bandwidth goes up on the M2 socket for AMD, we are gonna have some very interesting times on our hands. I think the biggest concern for Intel right now is oh s**t how good is M2 gonna be, they around see how good x2s and a64s do on DDR, what are they gonna do with the increased bandwidth capabilities of DDR2.

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:18 pm

killswitch83 wrote:Jack for breakfast? Damn man, now you're beginning to sound like me, rofl. Hell, I got bent on my 22nd a few months ago, so I can't say anything, lol

Don't worry I' have some beer too...no work till Wed.

I've had the worst week of my life (not going to elaborate!)...I need to forget it!
I have EVERY episode of married with children here....all 11 series... I should be good for a while..LOL

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:21 pm

dicecca112 wrote:
kenc51 wrote:
dicecca112 wrote:kenc51 those are not intels new 65nm chips as I see it. It is just a die shrink of the current that we have now. Dothan @ 65nm = Yonah, Smithfield @ 65nm = Dempsey. So to me the real 65nm chips are the Memrom based chips ie Conroe. Which it looks like is gonna contain Intels version of an Onboard Memory Controller and HTT.
I know but the lower TDP is "getting there"

There newer chips "look great".....Until we see AMD and Intels new chips...????
My point was AMD are in a better position than ever....

Intel will always have the upperhand when $$$ comes into play
Oh absolutely, I was more or less agreeing, although it didn't really come across that way.

I think if they can get Memrom to Yonah power levels, throw a memory controller on it, and up the FSB and Bandwidth on these chips, and then if the bandwidth goes up on the M2 socket for AMD, we are gonna have some very interesting times on our hands. I think the biggest concern for Intel right now is oh s**t how good is M2 gonna be, they around see how good x2s and a64s do on DDR, what are they gonna do with the increased bandwidth capabilities of DDR2.

Latency is the key...DDR2 has bad latency...so it will be interesting what AMD does to make use of the extra clock cycles to improve perofrmance....

It all good......