The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

Intel births Meltdown-friendly mobile quad core

And a litter of dual cores

Intel has birthed a recession-friendly quad core mobile processor. And you can find one at the heart of a new Acer laptop. Maybe.

According to the Intel's latest processor price list (PDF warning), the chip giant is offering five new mobile CPUs as of December 28: one ultra-low-cost quad core and four high-end dual cores.

The new quad core - dubbed the Intel Core 2 Extreme Q9000 - offers 6MB of level 2 cache, a 1.066GHz front-side bus, and a 2GHz core clock speed. Yet it sells for only $348 (in quantities of 1,000). All other Chipzilla mobile quad cores sell for at least $851, with the top-of-line QX9300 priced at $1,038.

It would seem that the Q9000 drives Acer's Aspire 8930G-7665, an $1,800 notebook that hit stores just this morning. But Acer refers to the Aspire's CPU as the "Intel Core 2 Quad Mobile Processor Q9000" and claims it offers 12MB of L2 cache and a 2.53GHz clock speed. Those specs match up with the more-expensive QX9300.

We've asked Acer for clarification, but the company has yet to provide it.

Though we question its trustworthiness, Acer's press release also says the new Aspire includes a 18.4-inch display, 4GB of DDR3 memory, a 500GB hard drive, a Blu-ray/DVD double-layer drive, a 6-in-1 digital media card reader, and a 802.11a/g/Draft-N WiFi adapter.

In any event, Intel has also launched four Core 2 Duo dual core mobile chips: the $530 T9800 (6MB L2 cache, 2.93GHz, 1.066MHz front side bus), the $348 P9600 (6MB L2 cache, 2.66GHz, 1.066MHz front side bus), the $316 T9550 (6MB L2 cache, 2.66GHz, 1.066MHz front side bus), and the $241 P8700 (6MB L2 cache, 2.53GHz, 1.066MHz front side bus). The "T" series chips are rated at 35 watts and the "P" series at 25 watts. ®

Updated

Acer has updated its press release to say that the Aspire's Q9000 chip offers 6MB of L2 cache and a 2GHz core clock speed.

Latest Comments

Use the Cores!

Most programs do not use the varying cores but what would be better is that if the several threads that make up each program were dedicated to different cores. Then the interference between differing programs would not occur; ie spam/virus/worm/spyware trackers could use a dedicated core, browser, email & messenger programs on another, multimedia on another, many of the OS stuff that isn't required for program interaction could be on the other.

This way streaming data wouldn't be interfered with, programs would run the way they are supposed to run, in an unbroken form & the utility programs that protect & operate the system would run efficiently.

This doesn't happen now & breaking programs into slices of cpu makes for a disintegrating OS. Stuff gets lost along the way. Just run a defrag & there's things not working properly afterwards. Slicing can be done but every now & then the slicing backs up too overflow & then things happen that you don't want to happen. Increase the cores, assign specific progs to set cores & these overflow problems should stop.

0
0

Bince

ACER sucks BIG-TIME! I see by the posts that I'm not the only one whom feels the same way about this either. Anyone think that MAYBE AMD will buy out Acer?

LOL!

0
0

er, why?

great, looks good on paper..

..but what will the four cores be used for?

what apps can multi-thread?

is this laptop meant for movie directors on the go?

imo, POINTLESS. what even uses a dual core properly?

laptops need to use less power, not more processing power. they should be concentrating on the reduction in the consumption of electricity and extending battery lives.

silly 'top trumps' product development leads nowhere. "i've got better specs than you! :P'

for sure, maybe with W7 or even a W7M, or something beyond that the OS will multi-thread, but looking at M$'s record in producing good clean small OS's that work a treat, what's the chances of that happening?

must be bored..

cheers,

bill

p.s. stuff and nonsense: http://www.eupeople.net/forum

0
0

Acer?

Seriously Acer? WTF? Who cares about a shit company. I would rather have a Dell then an Acer seeing as 99% of what they put out is trash. Not to mention the blatent lies in the spec they released.

Idiots

0
0

Acer?

Seriously Acer? WTF? Who cares about a shit company. I would rather have a Dell then an Acer seeing as 99% of what they put out is trash. Not to mention the blatent lies in the spec they released.

Idiots

0
0

More from The Register

US boffin builds 32-way Raspberry Pi cluster
Beowulf cluster built for the price of a single PC
Nintendo throws flaming legal barrel at YouTubing fans
All your walk-through vid revenue are belong to us
Review: HP Pavilion 14 Chromebook
All roads lead to Chrome?
Borked your iDevice? Pay EVEN MORE to have it fixed by Applecare
Or scream at their hapless techies on their forums
Euro PC shipments plummet into bottomless pit of DOOOOM
11th quarter of decline, 20pc drop on last year - Gartner
 breaking news
Report: AT&T dropping Facebook phone after dismal sales
Turns out folks won't buy that for a dollar
Which petite model likes a fondle and GETTING WET? Sony's Xperia ZR
Take this new mobe swimming. Just not deep, or for long, OK?
Google adds Atari Easter Egg for Breakout's birthday
Cute game born in Jobsian heart of darkness