Intels Core Solo

Is this just a rebranded Pentium M?

 

From Wiki:

I doubt it's a "rebranded" M in the sense that they just made up a new name for it, but I guess they're very similar. Sort of a halfway step between P4s and Core 2s?

 

More like a chip between the Pentium M and the Core 2's... I'd say the Pentium M itself was the step between the P4 and the Core 2.

And ultimately it kind of depends on how you define "rebranding", it's pretty subjective (if you ask me) as to say when a new core differs enough from an old core to really call it "new"or a "rebranding"

 

I somewhere read that they actually perform worse than dothans!!
use more power and loud higher without giving much in return...

 

I think of them as souped up Pentium Ms, at least the ULV ones are.

 

doesnt the name say it all? a core duo with one core saves money and probably power, like above said

 

The core solo is exactly the same as the core duo, except it has only 1 core. So it's not a Pentium M, its a core 1 architecture.

 

It's core duo; with one core.

 

So if the second core is there, is there any possibility of reactivating it?

 

There is no second core in Core Solo... There's only one, thus the name, Core Solo. Core Duo has two cores.

Core Solo is not a Core Duo processor with one core disabled; what would be the logic in that?

 

Probably not I do not think it even has the second core. IMO it is just a core duo with a missing core. Thats why it's called core solo. IMO solo sounds much cooler then duo. Duo sounds like a toothbrush.

 

The problem I have with it is that the Core Solo does in fact seem to be a revamped Pentium M with the Core Duo just being a "two in one".
I'm not seeing any major changes between the hardware generations. Definitely nothing like from P3 to P4 where they introduced that ridiculous 21 stage pipeline.

Not that I'm an expert or anything, but I get the feeling a Core Duo is 2 Pentium M's with more L1 and L2 cache.

Edit for clarification: Not that I'm claiming its the same thing, obviously, but it doesnt seem like Intel started from scratch with the Core line.

 

A core solo is just a processor that failed at being a dual core, thus intel branded it as a core solo.

All these new cpus like the 2310, or 5470, or 7250 are just failed cpus that intel used as lower powered budget cpus.

The 7250 for example was supposed to be a 7300, but it's entire cache didn't work, so they marketed it as a 2.0GHz with only 2mb of cache.

 

I don't think so there are so many other changes then simply more L1 and L2 cache. I think they even had a die shrink over the years and for sure the next cpu line will have die shrink.

 

Cant be. You're saying they take factory mistakes and rebrand them. That creates a demand which creates a supply they have to meet, so now they're intentionally crippling entire batches.

I find it hard to believe that entire CPU lines are the result of factory mistakes, and they were never meant to exist.

 

Die shrinks are a constant result of Godwins Law and happen between every generation and often within generations. Technically its the only way to keep squeezing power, and isnt a justification for a new line or brand.

 

Their not factory mistakes. Their simply dies that do not meet the standards of a 2.4GHz 4mb cache cpu. Think about it, some cpus can OC to all hell, while others fall flat on their face. Every single die cannot be perfect, and thus cannot be clocked that high. It can only go to say 1.4GHz. So instead of throwing it out, intel just marketed it as a 1.4GHz core 2 duo.

If you don't believe it, search around. This has been talked about before.

 

I know AMD has done this in the past but this just sounds ridiculous because if that was the case sometimes just out of luck the second core would start working. Sorry but Intel does not make many mistakes.

 

And you're 100% sure of this how?

 

The Core and Core 2 series CPUs are a couple of Pentium M CPUs with a few tweaks put on one piece of silicon. Without this alternative to the Pentium 4 "netburst" route Intel would have gone up in smoke.

So Intel churns out vast numbers of dual core silicon and then tests each one. The best performing chips go into the top of the range slot, and so one. Chips where some of the cache doesn't work get sold as cheaper CPUs with 1MB cache. Chips where one CPU doesn't work get sold as Core Solo. etc.

Anyway, to answer the original question. Yes, Core Solo is Pentium M, with a few tweaks, and on a piece of silicon which contains another disabled CPU.

John

 

Nice. I was right.
Now I'd like to see a performance comparison between a Pentium M and a Core Solo.

 

There are various sources of information: The SuperPi thread, the wPrime thread, SiSoftware Sandra's results database.

John

 

Yep. This is the explanation as I know it as well. For some reason these facts are not well known. But they have been widely confirmed, exactly as stated above.