Intel is serious about its smartphone and tablet processor.
Some details about the 22 nm Silvermont architecture have been leaked from China and were picked up by German website Computerbase.de.
Silvermont's Valleyview processors will be available at the end of 2013 with up to four cores and clock speeds of 1.2 to 1.4 GHz clock speeds. The SoC will apparently include Gen 7 Ivy Bridge class graphics engines with four cores. The platform will support up to 8 GB DDR3L or LPDDR2 memory. The quad-core Valleyview processor will also introduce 1 MB shared L2 cache for each pair of cores.
As part of the upcoming Bay Trail platform, Valleyview supposedly be offered in two packaging types and is likely to be offered in variety of applications and not just tablets and smartphones. Intel could be following Nvidia's lead and use Valleyview to compete in all mobile applications as well as emerging automotive and industrial fields.
If Intel can take Valleyview's specs from a presentation to reality, it is clear that this is the Atom variant we have been waiting for since 2008, when Intel promised a capable SoC for the smartphone market.
The Asus U24E-xs71 laptop is around 3.5 pounds and has a full blown Sandy Bridge 2.8/3.5GHZ CPU. Sure it's $800 right now but wait 2 years and then why not buy that compared to the latest atom netbook.
Yes, reading would help. Third paragraph:
"likely to be offered in variety of applications and not just tablets and smartphones"
I wasn't waiting.
Stupid people/extreme novices just go for the absolute cheapest (atom, or e-series apu), trying to get their fancy new pc run smooth. Obviously they are frustrated about the performance and lose interest in the pc technology, making more people uneducated and go choose apple or other stupid stuff like an i7 for office use.
Stupid people/extreme novices just go for the absolute cheapest (atom, or e-series apu), trying to get their fancy new pc run smooth. Obviously they are frustrated about the performance and lose interest in the pc technology, making more people uneducated and go choose apple or other stupid stuff like an i7 for office use.
sounds like most people from my class (high school).
What don't you get by: "smart phone, tablet and cars applications"?
This chip is NOT for computer use, it would be like using a Tegra in a Desktop and complain about the lack of performance compared to a core-i 3,5 or 7.
It just shows you didn't get the point of that chip at all. With that kind of mind you can also complain about how core-i7 are weak compared to the Xeon-phi or says that GTX690 sucks when compared to the S20 models of NVIDIA.
So please when comparing power/consumption/efficiency, try to think about application, not absolute spec...
I do know the point of such a tiny chip. I was making an ANALOGY. Of course Atom is best suited for mobile/low wattage devices. But I had to remind everyone that not so long ago, netbooks (now obsolete) were geared with Atom chips. I never mentioned Desktops using Atom. Below i3 and FX I can mention Core2Duo, Athlons and so on. Some markets (other less developed countries) still include this kind of CPUs in entry level notebooks/netbooks, and I was referring to that.
And about the i7 reference, you just made clear that you dont know how to read properly, making up whatever your mind wants to read.
Anyway, good on this development by Intel. I just wanted to made clear how bad the Atom was back in the day. Now i can add that taking this path for it is a better choice from its manufacturer.
PC sounds like desktop to me.
The leaked fact sheet says 1.2 - 2.4 GHz, please is it so hard to proof read the articles at least once before publishing it? - Is it so hard to make quality articles based on the facts in front of the eyes? Some of the writers (note the word some) work hard to make "Toms Hardware - The authority of lazy journalism." the new slogan!