2007 Mobile Roadmap

What will the future hold for Core 2 Duo?  The table below shows you the lineup by Q2 of next year:

 CPU Clock Speed FSB L2 Cache

Intel Core 2 Duo T7700

2.40GHz

800MHz

4MB

Intel Core 2 Duo T7600

2.33GHz

667MHz

4MB

Intel Core 2 Duo T7500

2.20GHz

800MHz

4MB

Intel Core 2 Duo T7400

2.16GHz

667MHz

4MB

Intel Core 2 Duo T7300

2.00GHz

800MHz

4MB

Intel Core 2 Duo T7200

2.00GHz

667MHz

4MB

Intel Core 2 Duo T7000

1.80GHz

800MHz

4MB

Intel Core 2 Duo T5600

1.83GHz

667MHz

2MB

Intel Core 2 Duo T5500P*

1.66GHz

667MHz

2MB

Intel Core 2 Duo T5500*

1.66GHz

667MHz

2MB

Intel Core 2 Duo L7500

1.60GHz

800MHz

4MB

Intel Core 2 Duo L7400

1.50GHz

667MHz

4MB

Intel Core 2 Duo L7300

1.40GHz

800MHz

4MB

Intel Core 2 Duo L7200

1.33GHz

667MHz

4MB

Intel Core 2 Duo U7500

1.06GHz

533MHz

2MB

*Note: These CPUs lack Intel Virtualization Technology (VT) support)

By the end of this year you can expect a T5500 running at 1.66GHz for $209, but the rest of the new models won't appear until next year.  In Q1 2007 Intel will introduce the first Low Voltage Core 2 Duo processors, the L7400 and L7200 at 1.5GHz and 1.33GHz respectively.  In Q2 2007, Intel will introduce all of the 800MHz FSB Core 2 Duo parts, as well as the Ultra Low Voltage Core 2 Duo U7500. 

The difference between the T5500P and the T5500 is that the former is a Socket-P part (Santa Rosa platform), while the latter is Socket-M (Napa platform).

Model Numbers Galore Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo
POST A COMMENT

46 Comments

View All Comments

  • juanpoh - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link

    Looking at http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentiumm/i...">Intel Pentium M link, only 915 and 855 chipset is supported. However 945 chipset is listed as supported in http://www.intel.com/products/processor/celeron_m/...">Intel Celeron M link. Reply
  • jaybuffet - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link

    I have the nx9420 notebook with the 945pm chipset... i was on hp support yesterday, and they said they would not support upgrading the CPU.. does that mean i am SOL because they wont upgrade the BIOS to support it? Reply
  • Pjotr - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link

    Please correct the percentage numbers on http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...

    "17.5% increase in performance" -> "17.5 % less time used" OR "21.3 % increaase in performance"

    Same mistake for all other time based benchmarks.
    Reply
  • shecknoscopy - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link

    Given the nearly identical architectures of the desktop Conroes and the new Merom chips - how well do all of you think the two would stack up in a direct side-by-side comparison? This is open to blatant conjecture, of course, as the necessary hardware to <b>really</b> make a single-variable experiment isn't out there. But for those of us considering mobile-on-desktop options, how much of a performance cut would we see jumping from a Conroe to a Merom? Reply
  • IntelUser2000 - Saturday, August 5, 2006 - link

    quote:

    Given the nearly identical architectures of the desktop Conroes and the new Merom chips - how well do all of you think the two would stack up in a direct side-by-side comparison? This is open to blatant conjecture, of course, as the necessary hardware to <b>really</b> make a single-variable experiment isn't out there. But for those of us considering mobile-on-desktop options, how much of a performance cut would we see jumping from a Conroe to a Merom?


    Intel mentioned something about having different prefetchers that match the market, meaning Woodcrest's Prefetchers are fit for workstation/server, Conroe for desktop, Merom for mobile applications(performance/battery life).

    If you look at Core Extreme X6800 vs. Core 2 Duo E6700 benchmarks, you can see that in some reviews the differences are greater than the 267MHz clock difference(10% clock difference). Maybe Core Extreme has superior prefetchers to the Core 2 Duos, giving advantage in select few applications.
    Reply
  • Sunrise089 - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link

    This was the exact question I just signed on to ask....so I await and answer as well. Reply
  • shecknoscopy - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link

    Woohoo! Great minds think alike, eh? Also, so do ours! Reply
  • JackPack - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link

    Which stepping did you use in this test? B1? Reply
  • EagleEye - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link

    I think the asus barebones configuration is mislabeled in this article. The s96j has the WXGA 1280x 800 screen while the z96j has the WSXGA 1680x 1050 screen. They either had an s96j or the native resolution is wrong as they stated it. Reply
  • Kalessian - Thursday, August 3, 2006 - link

    I noticed that, too. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now