Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (152592)	12/14/2001 6:19:18 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Z, <Does anyone have the power consumption specs on these beasts? (Mobile K6-2 and mobile- uh, what was the codename for the mobile Celeron back then?)> I don't remember it that well. The "mobile" K6-2 at the time was actually a desktop CPU shoehorned into a mobile form factor. At the time, it pushed the envelop for power consumption in a typical laptop, but compared to now, back then was nothing. I don't remember what speed that K6-2 ran at, but I do remember Celeron going to 400 MHz while mobile Pentium II stayed at 300 MHz. All of these CPUs I'm talking about was 0.25u. The mobile Pentium II was called Dixon, and it had 256K of on-die cache. The mobile Celeron didn't have a codename, I think, but it was like Dixon with half the cache. Tenchusatsu

To: SilentZ who wrote (152592)	12/14/2001 6:22:48 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Z, Re: "Does anyone have the power consumption specs on these beasts?" What's the point? Notebook manufacturers have no doubt redefined credible mobile power ranges since then. For example, Intel thinks that Thin&Light notebooks should not be more than 22W (shockingly, this happens to be in line with the thermal range for Tualatin). AMD's solution goes up to 25W, so I'm sure AMD will redefine mobile solutions to fit their power envelope. Likewise, I wouldn't be surprised if AMD proclaims 30W for a maximum Full Sized laptop range (being that this is an easy range for Palomino and later TBred/Barton to fall into, and at the same time, puts pressure on Pentium 4), while Intel urges it to 35W. Like it or not, mobile systems are trending towards higher power. Batteries are improving, but likely not as fast as CPU wattage levels. I have a friend that claims his laptop, rated at several hours of battery, still can't handle a 45-minute game of Alpha Centauri before warning of a low battery. This either opens up market demand for low power chips from VIA or Transmeta, or perhaps allows for Intel's Banias in 2003, if Intel can deliver a lower power, but higher performance chip. Until then, though, if I were in charge of Intel's mobile lines, I would certainly try to market those voltage scaled Tualatin chips for lower powered, higher battery life mobile PCs that maximize on battery life, while delivering high performance - that's something that neither AMD, nor VIA/Transmeta, can claim right now. wbmw