Bookmark and Share


In a bid to offer its customers a very affordable dual-core microprocessor, Intel Corp. plans to release Intel Pentium D model 805 chip in March, 2006. The chip will work at lower clock-speed and will utilize less speedy processor system bus, still, the product will be able to offer advantages of two processing engines.

“There is Intel Pentium D 805 in our roadmap, according my information it will be available in March 2006. This is low priced dual-core CPU – 2.66GHz, 533MHz FSB,” Intel spokesman Radoslaw Walczyk told X-bit labs.

Earlier Alzasoft online store based in Czech Republic began to take orders on the Intel Pentium D processor 805 that runs at 2.66GHz, uses 533MHz processor system bus and sports 2MB cache (1MB per core). The chip is expected to cost about $200 with all taxes included, which is probably an indicator that wholesale pricing for the processor will be much less than $200 - $163 or $178, even though Intel Corp. officials declined to comment on the price-points.

“Until release date we cannot provide you with exact pricing information,” Mr. Walczyk said.

Intel recently releases updated flavours of its dual-core NetBurst processors – the Intel Pentium D 900-series – that offer slightly higher performance compared to the predecessors – Intel Pentium D 800-series. The more advanced chips are made using thinner and more cost-effective 65nm process technology and Intel will need to get rid of the lower speed Pentium D 800-series chips somehow so that to ramp up the volume of more lucrative products.

Currently the least expensive Pentium D 820 dual-core chip costs $241 in 1000-unit quantities at Intel, the price-point not suitable for the mainstream market. By offering Intel Pentium D 805 for less than $200, the company will be able to sell more dual-core chips. The Pentium D 805 processor with low-speed processor system bus as well as moderate frequency is likely to receive lackluster welcome by computer enthusiasts, still users who demand general-purpose performance and deal with a lot of applications at once are expected to like the new product.


Comments currently: 11
Discussion started: 01/23/06 06:07:25 AM
Latest comment: 08/25/06 10:51:46 AM
Expand all threads | Collapse all threads


boost the QP FSB to 800 from 533 and you get a 4GHz monster, will require good cooling though.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 01/23/06 08:43:11 AM]

I wonder witch production proces it will produced.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 01/23/06 12:36:34 PM]

This looks like a product no one would want and wouldn't be that cheap to make being dual core.

It's a 90nm beast based on the the model name, which starts with 8, so it isn't going to overclock very high without requiring one to rewire their house for the massive amounts of power it needs, and then try to cool the damn thing.

The performance is going to suck at that low a clock speed and will generally be outperformed by a high clocked uniprocessor on the vast majority of applications.

I don't get it. Intel's yields have to be high enough for this processor that downclocking saves them no money. The market this targets has to be extremely limited and probably appeals to the poorly informed that somehow think a dual processor is something they have to have, without understanding it. A higher clocked uniprocessor would be much smaller, and the yields for even the 3.6s have to be very high since this processor is not limited in clock speed by anything but power consumption, which in any event would not be higher than a slow dual like this one. A slow memory bus even makes it worse since you have two of these pigs fighting for it.

Before someone suggests overclockers, keep in mind that this represents an extremely small market and not a very wealthy one. Besides, they'll buy AMD anyway. If this were a 65nm processor, I'd see how this could be plausible, but at 90nm and two of these furnaces running, you can't clock too high because of the power issues. That assumes this is 90nm, but if it's not, why did Intel give it "8" as a starting number? Also, I suspect Intel would want to make higher priced parts with their newest lithography rather than these degenerate processors, since right now they have only have limited production capability at 65nm. It would have made a lot more sense at 65nm later on when they had moved most of their production to the finer lithography. At 90nm, it makes much less sense.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 01/23/06 04:46:25 PM]
- collapse thread

It makes pretty good sense since these would be most likely 800 parts that didn't do the power/frequency envelope of 820's. Intel would have to dump these into thash otherwise, this way they could make time hard for AMD and make money from nothing all at once. Sounds like win-win situation for Intel and consumer.

As for AMD , the moment they have FAB36 up and running they would most probably lower 3800+ prices and make something like 3400+ X2's. Also on the performance Intel can't touch them on 90nm and AMD could sell as much high end X2's as it can produce, so no threat here too.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 01/24/06 07:25:10 AM]


Add your Comment

Related news

Latest News

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

10:48 pm | LG’s Unique Ultra-Wide Curved 34” Display Finally Hits the Market. LG 34UC97 Available in the U.S. and the U.K.

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

12:52 pm | Lisa Su Appointed as New CEO of Advanced Micro Devices. Rory Read Steps Down, Lisa Su Becomes New CEO of AMD

Thursday, August 28, 2014

4:22 am | AMD Has No Plans to Reconsider Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Cards. AMD Will Not Lower Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Solutions

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

1:09 pm | Samsung Begins to Produce 2.13GHz 64GB DDR4 Memory Modules. Samsung Uses TSV DRAMs for 64GB DDR4 RDIMMs

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

10:41 am | AMD Quietly Reveals Third Iteration of GCN Architecture with Tonga GPU. AMD Unleashes Radeon R9 285 Graphics Cards, Tonga GPU, GCN 1.2 Architecture