New 32nm Atoms Surface on Intel's Website
The latest version of Intel's processor price list includes the company's first 32 nm Atom processors.
Two yet-to-be-announced Cedarview Atom CPUs, the D2700 and the D2500, are now officially listed as available for tray purchases. Both versions are clocked higher than their predecessors, but are offered at lower prices.
The D2700 arrives with 2.13 GHz and support for four threads, while the D525 was available with four threads support and 1.80 GHz. The D2500 is clocked with 1.86 GHz, supports only two threads and will replace the D425 with 1.80 GHz.
Intel also responds to criticism that its Atom processors are too expensive. The D2700 has a tray price of $52 and the D2500 carries a $42 price tag. The D525 is currently offered for $63.
The Cedarview processors are still in a lofty price range, even if we hear from Intel that these new processors may be substantially faster than their 45 nm counterparts. For tablet applications, we already know that good-enough processors dominate the market and Intel will have to come much closer to the $20 to $30 price range to have a greater chance to become a rival for ARM implementations.

'nuff said
Finger's crossed.
'nuff said
No. There are a lot of reasons they would charge more than $10.
Many things go into pricing different models. the raw cost of One part is just a tiny bit.
There is first the underlying hardware (cooling, battery, etc) for the faster processor. It will use a bit more power, generate more heat, need to be cooled. This can mean a different or bigger cooler with a more robust fan.
The cost of maintaining more than one product line. This is a large part of it too. Having more than one model of an item creates more work to keep them separate, differentiate them in design, shipping, packaging, marketing, accounting, parts, warranty, etc.. hundreds of factors.
The fact they want to be able to sell BOTH of these is perhaps the biggest one. They target the lower end one at a smaller price point, the higher one for a nicer higher specced (often with more options) version. Who is going to buy the lower end model if the higher end one is only $10 more?
They probably also want to make a profit, but if you want to start your own company that doesn't profit, never makes enough to re-invest in R&D, and goes out of business soon after, by all means, just use only your own money to do it.
Sorry, that is just how business works.
The real push for them will come with a 22 or 14nm Atom with a mature Intel GPU similar to Ivy or Sandy Bridge.
Now that Google is working with Intel, forget about it. ARM WILL be out. Intel in the past has leveraged its insane margins to cut prices to OEM's like Dell or Apple or now Google in order to get control of a market. ARM's days are numbered. Soon we'll be doing H.264 rendering on our smartphones and tablets thanks to Intel and Quicksync.
Personally I do not understand why they don't go down to the 22nm level like the ivy bridge processors? They would be right on par with ARM procs for TDP, and be able to do so much more. Plus (if the process is good) they could get an even higher yield and get that sad price point down another $10 or so. That would also fend off AMD which has much better/cheaper native GPU support that leaves intel in the dust.
go intel go!
id love to see intel processor in my cellphone someday.
ARM is having to continually add cores and increase the complexity (Arm Cortex-A9, Cortex-A15) to improve tablet/phone performance. NVidia Tegra 3 has 5 ARM cores. TI has a 4/6 ARM core part for late 2012. Performance gains are largely coming from clock speed increases as they doubled the pipeline stages from A9-A13 (8 stage integer vs 17 stage integer). Which means they'll also run into frequency and core limits like Intel/AMD did.
Intel just has to keep shrinking and move to Tri-Gate which it's doing next year. (22nm tri-gate). It's really only the power consumption keeping them out of the tablets right now. Once Intel attaches a memory to the Atom (like Apple A5/A4 does) the Atom platform power requirements will drop significantly.
I wish them luck but someone needs to help them more with the FAB tech. Intel has a 2 year lead.
ARM would be an idiot to stay still in this kind of market heating up. I wager they'll continue to come out with new and improved lower power designs. The real question is, will Intel catch up to ARM? Or will the Atom flounder?
typo?
Not really. The D525 is a dual core Atom with HT, meaning it appears to operating systems as a quad core.
Unless Intel can really leverage its fabrication advantage, they aren't beating ARM anytime soon. HD Graphics aren't a mature solution, by the way, not yet. Having an insanely highly-clocked GPU to make up for a performance deficit isn't a mature solution, regardless of how good QuickSync is.
The only way Intel is going to push ARM out over the short-term future would be to employ the same illegal tactics used against AMD. It's just not going to happen. Atom and ARM are vastly different architectures; we're simply not going to end up with x86 or x86-64 smartphones as the norm overnight, even with a new design for the purpose. ARM products are far easier and cheaper to manufacture right now than Atom CPUs; at the very least, we'd end up with much more expensive smartphones if we had future Atom CPUs in there. I would fully expect a non-Atom CPU from Intel targeting this segment, if anything.
I'm afraid that super-fast video encoding on a tablet or smartphone isn't exactly on its way very soon.
with more and more consumer devices require powerful low power chips its a good market to be in