Rumored dual-core Atom details get fleshed out

We'd already heard that Intel planned to trot out some dual-core Atom processors sooner or later, and the Fudzilla website has now turned up a few more details on 'em courtesy of a supposedly legitimate leak. According to it, the first dual-core processor will be dubbed the Atom 330, and will clock in at the same 1.6GHz as the current single-core Atom 230 (no word on that 1.87GHz version we heard about previously). What's more, the processor will supposedly pack 1MB cache memory (twice the amount of the current single-core processor), and boast a TDP rating of just 8W, which is a good deal more than the 2W rating the current Atom 230 has, but still far less than any of Intel's other low-voltage processors. Still no word on a price for it, unfortunately, but it's said to be on track for a release sometime in the third quarter of this year.

[Via Electronista]

[Chad @ May 26th 2008 2:11PM]

Give me quad-core mobile processors first!

[pxa270 @ May 26th 2008 2:20PM]

The current Core 2 Duo ULV processors (U7500, - U7700) have a TDP of 10W, so the 8W TDP of this Atom is not really "far less than any of Intel's other low-voltage processors". In fact, the current Core 2 Solos (U2100, U2200) have a TDP of only 5.5W.

[Keaton @ May 26th 2008 3:18PM]

so much for low power....

[loosely_coupled @ May 26th 2008 4:43PM]

I agree. And what I don't get is that the Core 2 Duo ULV processors kick the shit out of a similarly clocked ATOM at almost the same power usage!!! WTF?? Even the Core 2 Celeron ULV chips are faster.
It looks to me like the ATOM will be near worthless for ANYTHING other than smartphones and so-called "MIDS". I don't think they'll even be able to compete for todays UMPCs and especially mini-notebooks like the EEPC.

And as far as smartphones go, No one is yet using ARM's latest. Their Cortex-A9 chips are dual-core, scale to over 1.0Ghz, and use hardly any more power than the current ARM11!!

I think everyone is overhyping the ATOM and it is going to have a tough time competing with new stuff from ARM, especially being the newcomer to the market. Also, with windows mobile, Symbian, Android, and OSX operating systems and development SDKs already having been ported to ARM, what good does x86 do in a small mobile device? Its not like you'd want to run windows XP on a smartphone... Both the OS and the UI on small devices has to be vastly modified anyways.

[Ninjakamster (XBL: RNK2K) I miss you PS3! : ( @ May 26th 2008 5:07PM]

Agreed, I am leery of these Atom processors, sure a lot of hype and excitement about them, especially from Engadget but I'm not feeling it.
I've mainly used the Pentium M and Core 2 Duo ULV processors and am very happy with them.

I would love if the MSI Wind, HP Mini-Note and EEE 900 could have even used Core Solo or even Pentium M ULV processors.

I think the really only benefit of Atom is its low price compared to Intel's ULV chips?

[B @ May 27th 2008 2:13AM]

There is confusion with TDP of Atom processors. Some sources state 2W or 4W for a single core Atom. It means probably there are different voltage versions just like with Celerons-M and C2D chips.

8W for dual core Atom if it isn't for any special ULV version is pretty good. You will not also get any 10W ULV C2D chips for cheap.

[Christian @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:36PM]

This is all pointless... keep reading about the release and what it is. It's more of 2 separate processors tide together instead of 1 core 2 duo processor. Like the first generation of the dual processors that intel first came out with. Great for small desktops but not NetBooks(too bulky). Look down the line in 2009(possibly 1010) before that's introduced.

[digitallysick @ May 26th 2008 3:04PM]

Lets see, i need a dualcore atom, solid state drive, umm *insert other extreme power saving parts*

[bolezhinkov @ May 26th 2008 3:25PM]

hey its not that extreme if you find yourself running low on battery or have some kind of guilt complex regarding energy consumption!

[Ebzy @ May 26th 2008 3:28PM]

*Nvidia triple sli 8800 ultra* perhaps?

[Reader @ May 26th 2008 6:53PM]

George Foreman grill?

[David G. @ May 26th 2008 9:16PM]

LED LCD, that should be fairly obvious.

[CosterMonger @ May 26th 2008 3:54PM]

I'd love the ability to simply turn one core off and on at will.

so it looks like I'll be waiting for these suckers to come out before I get a sub-notebook

[Lorre @ May 26th 2008 4:02PM]

Let's see... 8 watts vs 2 watts for a single core... I'll go with 4 single cores then... QUAD processor Eee PC ftw.

[poematik14 @ May 26th 2008 4:38PM]

Dual core EEE confirmed?

[Andrew @ May 26th 2008 6:00PM]

Shouldn't an EEE PC use a triple core CPU?

[pfromg @ May 26th 2008 5:54PM]

oh yawn.
This atom is just so utterly boring.
I cant excited about a very slow chip.I mean what kind of marketing crap is this? We are meant to think that slower is now somehow better or what gives?

Is there no end to this rubbish?
Is the consumer now so stupid that they will buy into this backward crap?

[Shinigami @ May 26th 2008 5:56PM]

With Intel's ridiculous price policy this dual-core CPU will cost as much as half of the device it is made for...

[Jons @ May 26th 2008 6:41PM]

Up and atom!

[Chad @ May 26th 2008 7:48PM]

Up and at them.

[Joshua Walters @ May 26th 2008 7:16PM]

Great, do I buy a micro top now, or do I wait till the dual core atom.....

[Marc art @ May 27th 2008 1:22AM]

I think the new dual core atom will Be in the Willcom D4 UMPC. Check this pic http://www.ubergizmo.com/zoom.php?dir=2008/4/sharp-willcom-d4/&page=5

Shows dual Atom's at 1.33mhz

[Tha_Bounce @ May 27th 2008 4:49AM]

I believe the hype comes from the cost of manufacturing them.

[André @ May 27th 2008 12:15PM]

And their size.

[Gabriel @ May 27th 2008 6:52AM]

After reading tests performed on available Atom, a dual-core is most likely what is needed in order for Atom to be of any real use in any system that is not small enough to fit in your palm.

But considering that, as many has said before, the Core2 Solo ULV doesn't consume much more power than a dual-core Atom, and it would out-perform it by miles, the only advantage Atom might have is it's [supposedly] cheap price tag.

If it turns out that a dual-core Atom is much much cheaper than say a Core2 Solo, only then would I consider it. If not, it probably has no business in personal computers...

That's my view, at least.

[Beni @ May 27th 2008 7:48PM]

Dual core Atom processor. Wouldn't that mean its a Intel Compound?

[bro-bro @ Jun 4th 2008 5:20PM]

i ♥ atoms! they are fasinating! maybe the e=mc2 will apply to the centripical force which adds hydrogen to the atomic bomb. that would be cool!

[nortexoid @ Aug 15th 2008 7:20PM]

I bet a Core 2 Solo kicks the pants off a dual core Atom in most netbook and UMPC apps. Most apps in those categories aren't multi-threaded anyway, and multitasking isn't a primary concern. Plus a Core 2 Solo, from what I've read, uses less power than a dual core Atom would!

Personally I don't see the interest in Atom for these sorts of markets.