It's called the Core Duo

When Yonah first started appearing on roadmaps, we knew it as Jonah, which then starting being written as Yonah.  Eventually, Intel confirmed its existence and we had always assumed that it would continue to use the name Pentium M.  However, given the great importance of the launch of Intel's first dual-core, low power, notebook processor, it shouldn't be much of a surprise that Intel has a new name in store for it.  As you've probably already heard, Yonah will receive the marketing name "Core" with the words "Duo" or "Solo" following it depending on whether it is the dual or single core version.  The name Centrino will still be there, but instead of referring to the processor as a Pentium M, it'll be called a Core Duo or a Core Solo.  The Centrino platform itself will be referred to as Centrino Duo when paired with a Core Duo processor.  We have to admit, we kind of like the new name.

Not so pleasant, however, are the new processor numbers that go along with the new processor names.  Gone are Intel's simple three-digit numbers and they have since been replaced with a four-digit number preceded by a letter.  The letter indicates the thermal envelope of the processor, while the following four digits denote the performance level of the CPU.  If you think that this sounds oddly similar to AMD's Turion processor nomenclature, don't worry; you'd be completely right (of course, the Turion only uses two numbers, while Core Duo uses four).  Maybe, one of these days, Intel will get around to copying some more important elements of AMD's history, such as an on-die memory controller or at least a serial bus interface. 

As an example of the numbers in use, the 2.0GHz processor that we previewed in the first article will be sold under the name "Intel Core Duo T2500".  For your reference, the T2600 will run at 2.16GHz (compared to the 2.0GHz T2500).  The Core Solo processors will feature a "1" after the "T" denoting a single core; for example, the Intel Core Solo T1300 will run at 1.66GHz. 

Intel's Core Duo and Solo processors both support a 667MHz FSB, which is enabled by the 945 chipset that Intel is pairing with them.  The move to a 667MHz FSB is necessary, thanks to the increased bandwidth demands of a dual core processor. 

As we mentioned in the first article, the Core Duo (and Solo) processors are not pin-compatible with the older Pentium M, even though they physically have the same number of pins. 


Dothan (Pentium M) on the left, Yonah (Core Duo) on the Right


Dothan (Pentium M) on the left, Yonah (Core Duo) on the Right

Other than the Core Duo, the rest of the Centrino Duo platform is composed of Intel's 945 Express chipset and Intel's 3945 wireless solution.  As always, in order to be able to use the Centrino brand, you need to use the CPU, chipset and wireless solution all together.  And as we have seen in the past, Intel's wireless solution has really started to offer significantly lower power consumption than the competition, so it is actually a brand that is worth it. 

What about Clock Speeds? A Fair Pentium M Comparison
Comments Locked

103 Comments

View All Comments

  • ncage - Monday, December 19, 2005 - link

    I swear this is the best first post ive ever seen. Good Post Alex. Ya competition is very good for the market. I think intel is starting to get back on track where they need to be. It all comes down to clock speed and cost at launch. What improvements will we see with the launch of amd's next chip other than ddr2 which right now i don't really care about and possibly more cores (at least for the opteron). I am not dogging amd because for about 3-4 years ive only used AMD chips but i think amd has to raise the bar even more.
  • Calin - Tuesday, December 20, 2005 - link

    DDR2 for AMD would be great at least for a few things:
    moving to single channel DDR2 memory would decrease costs (in mainboards and a bit in processors)
    moving integrated graphics to single or dual channel DDR2 would increase graphic performance and overall system performance in relation to single or dual channel DDR
    As for the high end, I really don't think an increase in memory bandwidth will help - not even for dual core processors. Maybe for a quad core, but quad cores are certainly for servers, and I don't know about registered DDR2 memory to be used in them.

    Hmmm, you could try an Opteron Dual Core with single channel DDR memory, to see how much performance would be lost by going quad core, dual DDR.
  • mlittl3 - Monday, December 19, 2005 - link

    I agree with both Alex and ncage. I really disliked Intel all through out the Pentium4/Net-burst days. They were just releasing marchitecture with no improvements whatsoever. I loved AMD for their innovation and performance/watt.

    Now both companies are equal but I don't think we will see the huge fall AMD suffered from when Intel released the Pentium 4 to compete with the Athlon/K7 architecture. The beauty of competition is showing its bright colors right now. If we only had Intel, we would have a very hot/power consuming inefficient Pentium 4 based on net-burst to play Quake 4 at 5fps right now.

    Its time for the fanboys to turnover a new leaf. Go Intel and AMD!!! We love both you guys.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now