This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Yonah (microprocessor) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from Yonah (microprocessor) was copied or moved into Intel Core with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Currently, the article reads "...codenamed Yonah (Hebrew transliteration for Jonah)..." Actually, Jonah is the English transliteration for Yonah. Yonah is a name mentioned in Hebrew in the Torah, a language thousands of years older than English.
I read somewhere (can't remember the source) that Core Duo with faults in one core might be sold as Core Solos (seems a sensible idea in terms of wastage). If anyone knows about this, perhaps it could be added to the article. CharlesC 12:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
This is absolutely true and is mirrored on several websites. In addition, all it takes is close inspection of a Core Solo chip to reveal that both execution cores are still present. In response to Ehurtley, the market for Core Solo is indeed small enough that it can be supported by the relatively low number of Core Duo manufacturing failures. It makes sense for Intel because they can still make some income off what would normally be a total loss. - Aanhorn
Are these real dual core CPUs like Athlon X2 or just 2 dies packaged into one like Pentium D? Personally I believe is the latter since both versions look exactly the same, and Intel could have easily disabled a core in core dual that have artifacts and brand it as core solo, thus increase the yield. This is something you cannot do with an Athlon X2 or other real dual core CPUs. -- antilived T | C 02:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
This is important information, someone please add it. the1physicist 02:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
from everyone's favorite site I just thought everyone might want to know. the1physicist 02:27, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
"the Core Duo is a 32-bit processor, though this means little in terms of actual performance"
I don't think that this necessarily particularly accurate, and probably shouldn't be here. x86_64 reveals 8 extra general purpose registers, and can make a very significant performance difference under certain circumstances. Some applications, in particular databases, also benefit greatly from 64bit arithmetic ops. Rsynnott 19:10, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
I recently made some edits to change some unit prefixes from decimal-based multipliers (e.g. M, G) to binary-based multipliers (Mi, Gi).
This is in line with WP:MOSNUM#Binary unit prefixes.
The values in question were memory sizes. Memory hardware nearly always exists in sizes which are a power of two, or a power of two with a few other prime factors.
In particular:
My edits were made with a proper edit summary, referencing WP:MOSNUM.
Some of those changes were reverted, presumably well-intentioned, but without any edit summary.
These reversions would therefore appear to be unjustified. Accordingly I have reverted them speedily.
I have also placed comments into the wiki markup to alert any other potential editors to this issue.
Please discuss here, and obtain consensus, before making any further changes on this issue.
Thanks, Duckbill 16:39, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
@ 2006-07-28 23:39Z
@ 2006-07-29 00:58Z
What is the source/significance of the names, Yonah, Merom, Sossaman? —wwoods 20:52, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
I have worked for Intel, in a position that dealt with working names and final product names. I have my doubts that "Yonah" was named for a Biblical figure because Intel's naming policy is that geographical names will be used for working names of products. IOW, the approvers of names have to be able to find the proposed name on a map. That's not to say that an Israeli team didn't find a geographical feature with a name they liked, but Mount Yonah in Georgia or maybe a geographic feature in Israel named Yonah (the town of Kefar Yonah?) was submitted to the names approval department.
Yonah = Jonah - man thrown overboard by his shipmantes and eaten by large fish. Not an auspicious name at all. ;-)
I went to have a look at WP:MOSNUM. It appears that WP:MOSNUM has recently received a significant large edit from a new user without the normal discussion taking place first. The edit has been reverted by more experienced hands. Discussion is in progress. We might be best off allowing new guidelines to settle for a while before rushing out making changes to pages such as this one. Duckbill 17:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I have improved the wording. Anyone who has ever used Windows x64 should know the problems are not as major as some people appear to have suggest. General application support is not really a problem. There are few applications compiled for x64 but most 32 bit apps applications work without problem on Windows x64. Applications which require the use of device drivers or more direct access to the operating system like anti-virus software and optimisers can be a problem but many of these now have x64 versions. Games are also rarely a problem. I've only had 2 kinds of problems vis-a-vis application compatibility. Ones related to stupid game installers which fail because they try to force an install of DirectX and when this fails they simply quit. The other ones are with programs that create boot disks since many of these use Dos programs. Nil Einne 12:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Device driver support is a somewhat different issue since they need to be written for x64. Given we are talking primarily about modern systems, primarily laptops, we can assume motherboard, sound cards, network card and video card drivers are not a problem. Generic devices like USB key also are not a problem. Digital cameras, printers and scanners can be a problem. Also some specialist devices like mobile phone data cables and I believe some fancy mice and joysticks don't have specialist drivers which provide more customisation or accuracy. Nil Einne 12:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
I think that "the lack of on-die memory controller" should be moved from shortcoming to advantages. It makes the processor more compatible with memory modules.
Can someone please explain why lack of support for EM64T/AMD64/x86-64 instructions is a "disadvantage?" I was unaware that slight increases in big integer performance and extra native addressing space were such marked advantages... I propose this line be removed from disadvantages. --
uberpenguin @ 2006-06-10 21:47Z
@ 2006-06-11 03:50Z
@ 2006-12-02T00:30Z
@ 2006-12-02T16:03Z
Were the sections removed by 58.69.61.111 appropriate? Should the edit be reverted? Frankie
Hi,
I was thinking about this one for a while...
When Intel markets these "dual core" chips, such as Core Duo and Pentium D, are they really "dual core," much like two physical processors, and able to work concurrently, or are they similar to the the "HyperThreading" technology, where two logical processor cores are allocated for a single core, and then a secondary hardware thread is executed while the primary thread is stalled (in cache miss, branch misprediction, or data dependency)?
Thoughts?
Jdstroy 06:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
The "Pentium Dual Core" T2060 from the Core processor list is not mentioned anywhere in here. It is just a budget version of the Core Duo, right? Shouldn't it be part of this article, despite its name? And has Intel given any official reason for resurrecting the Pentium brand name for its budget version of the Core Duo? 205.157.110.11 04:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Reply: The Pentium Dual Core is a chip shrouded in mystery as Intel is not releasing much information. Some claim it is a dual core version of the Pentium M, some say it is a cheap Core Duo with less cache. Until Intel comes out with more information,I firmly beleive we should leave Pentium Dual Core as a seperate article with perhaps a reference in the Core 2 Duo article. My reasons are as follows: - Pentium Dual core architecture may be based on any type of chip from Pentium M to Pentium D or even Core Duo. Until firm evidence of what family of chip it is related to is produced, we should keep it separate. - The chip has many technical difference to the Core Duo line of chips and is aimed at a different market. - Intel uses a different brand name for the Pentium Dual Core. If Intel does not want to call it Core Duo, there must be a sizable difference between the Pentium Dual Core and the Core Duo, worthy of creating a whole new brand. Hotdog111 10:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
"Pentium Dual Core" is the non EM64T version of the Pentium D. The only one available, T2060, is NOT A CORE PROCESSOR and still uses the Netburst Architecture that Pentium 4 processors use. It's the same construction as a Pentium D: two cedar mill dies flipped in on each other on a LGA 775 socket. Source: http://www.intel.com/products/processor_number/proc_info_table.pdf 71.103.162.89 20:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Reason for creation: Intel's reason for creating the Pentium Dual Core branding was to get a cheap processor into developing country markets. The Pentium name was resurrected for this task because of the familiarity that the Pentium name holds. It was intended to be kept away from the US but PC manufacturers started wanting it for a low end option for their customers, in most cases using it to replace the Celeron M. Source: Conversations with several Intel employees regarding the creation of it.
I do not believe it should be merged because of the differences between the chips. I do however believe that there should be a link to it through the Intel Core page.
It sure would be nice to know more precisely what features these chips have. VT (I would guess not)? EM64T (highly unlikely)? According to the sparse datasheet from Intel it does have: Execute Disable Bit, Enhanced Intel SpeedStep, SSE2, SSE3. DHR 17:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://cn.tech.yahoo.com/070109/472/2oh88.html&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=1&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3DT2060%2Bcpu-z%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG That link is an English translation of a Chinese site that has English screenshots of the program CPU-Z being run on a Pentium Dual-Core T2060. Perhaps this will help show some of it's features.
The disambiguation at the top of the page is confusing. "Mobile processor" seems to imply something to be used in a cell phone, palmtop computer, or similar device. Basically I read that it was directing me to Intel Core (CPU architecture), itself a redirect, which then proceeded to tell me (indirectly of course) that I was reading the wrong article (I should have been reading this article, apparently). (I was looking for the article on the processor used by Apple.) —16:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Intel now refers to all Core 2, Core i5 and Core i7 CPUs as 'Intel Core' processors, and the pages for Xeon and Celeron (not Pentium though) are structured to give an overview over all product lines that are have mostly identical (Celeron M, Celeron D, Celeron Dual-Core) names but are based on different technologies.
I propose moving this (minus the introduction) page to Yonah (microprocessor) to preserve its history, and to start a new overview page for the brands, structured something like
Much of the information in such an article would of course be duplicated from the current Core 2/Core i5/Core i7 articles, so those could eventually be merged into this page. Arndbergmann ( talk) 08:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Article currently claims that the Core Duo was the world's first sub-25W dual core processor, and was launched in Jan 06. These claims seem doubtful to me, as I cannot find any source for this statement, and I can easily find earlier examples of multicore processors that appear to consume less than 25W (often significantly so), e.g. Asynchronous array of simple processors which appears to have used <1W for a 36-core chip. Also, while I can find no contemporary description including the power dissipation figure, BlueGene/L appears to have been built in 2004 based on dual-core nodes dissipating 17W each, AFAICT.
The author may have meant that it was the first x86-compatible dual core with this power consumption, but that is not what it says, and even this I can find no source for confirmation. 212.159.69.4 ( talk) 13:54, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Yonah (microprocessor). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:27, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Yonah (microprocessor). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:39, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Yonah (microprocessor) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from Yonah (microprocessor) was copied or moved into Intel Core with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Currently, the article reads "...codenamed Yonah (Hebrew transliteration for Jonah)..." Actually, Jonah is the English transliteration for Yonah. Yonah is a name mentioned in Hebrew in the Torah, a language thousands of years older than English.
I read somewhere (can't remember the source) that Core Duo with faults in one core might be sold as Core Solos (seems a sensible idea in terms of wastage). If anyone knows about this, perhaps it could be added to the article. CharlesC 12:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
This is absolutely true and is mirrored on several websites. In addition, all it takes is close inspection of a Core Solo chip to reveal that both execution cores are still present. In response to Ehurtley, the market for Core Solo is indeed small enough that it can be supported by the relatively low number of Core Duo manufacturing failures. It makes sense for Intel because they can still make some income off what would normally be a total loss. - Aanhorn
Are these real dual core CPUs like Athlon X2 or just 2 dies packaged into one like Pentium D? Personally I believe is the latter since both versions look exactly the same, and Intel could have easily disabled a core in core dual that have artifacts and brand it as core solo, thus increase the yield. This is something you cannot do with an Athlon X2 or other real dual core CPUs. -- antilived T | C 02:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
This is important information, someone please add it. the1physicist 02:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
from everyone's favorite site I just thought everyone might want to know. the1physicist 02:27, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
"the Core Duo is a 32-bit processor, though this means little in terms of actual performance"
I don't think that this necessarily particularly accurate, and probably shouldn't be here. x86_64 reveals 8 extra general purpose registers, and can make a very significant performance difference under certain circumstances. Some applications, in particular databases, also benefit greatly from 64bit arithmetic ops. Rsynnott 19:10, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
I recently made some edits to change some unit prefixes from decimal-based multipliers (e.g. M, G) to binary-based multipliers (Mi, Gi).
This is in line with WP:MOSNUM#Binary unit prefixes.
The values in question were memory sizes. Memory hardware nearly always exists in sizes which are a power of two, or a power of two with a few other prime factors.
In particular:
My edits were made with a proper edit summary, referencing WP:MOSNUM.
Some of those changes were reverted, presumably well-intentioned, but without any edit summary.
These reversions would therefore appear to be unjustified. Accordingly I have reverted them speedily.
I have also placed comments into the wiki markup to alert any other potential editors to this issue.
Please discuss here, and obtain consensus, before making any further changes on this issue.
Thanks, Duckbill 16:39, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
@ 2006-07-28 23:39Z
@ 2006-07-29 00:58Z
What is the source/significance of the names, Yonah, Merom, Sossaman? —wwoods 20:52, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
I have worked for Intel, in a position that dealt with working names and final product names. I have my doubts that "Yonah" was named for a Biblical figure because Intel's naming policy is that geographical names will be used for working names of products. IOW, the approvers of names have to be able to find the proposed name on a map. That's not to say that an Israeli team didn't find a geographical feature with a name they liked, but Mount Yonah in Georgia or maybe a geographic feature in Israel named Yonah (the town of Kefar Yonah?) was submitted to the names approval department.
Yonah = Jonah - man thrown overboard by his shipmantes and eaten by large fish. Not an auspicious name at all. ;-)
I went to have a look at WP:MOSNUM. It appears that WP:MOSNUM has recently received a significant large edit from a new user without the normal discussion taking place first. The edit has been reverted by more experienced hands. Discussion is in progress. We might be best off allowing new guidelines to settle for a while before rushing out making changes to pages such as this one. Duckbill 17:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I have improved the wording. Anyone who has ever used Windows x64 should know the problems are not as major as some people appear to have suggest. General application support is not really a problem. There are few applications compiled for x64 but most 32 bit apps applications work without problem on Windows x64. Applications which require the use of device drivers or more direct access to the operating system like anti-virus software and optimisers can be a problem but many of these now have x64 versions. Games are also rarely a problem. I've only had 2 kinds of problems vis-a-vis application compatibility. Ones related to stupid game installers which fail because they try to force an install of DirectX and when this fails they simply quit. The other ones are with programs that create boot disks since many of these use Dos programs. Nil Einne 12:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Device driver support is a somewhat different issue since they need to be written for x64. Given we are talking primarily about modern systems, primarily laptops, we can assume motherboard, sound cards, network card and video card drivers are not a problem. Generic devices like USB key also are not a problem. Digital cameras, printers and scanners can be a problem. Also some specialist devices like mobile phone data cables and I believe some fancy mice and joysticks don't have specialist drivers which provide more customisation or accuracy. Nil Einne 12:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
I think that "the lack of on-die memory controller" should be moved from shortcoming to advantages. It makes the processor more compatible with memory modules.
Can someone please explain why lack of support for EM64T/AMD64/x86-64 instructions is a "disadvantage?" I was unaware that slight increases in big integer performance and extra native addressing space were such marked advantages... I propose this line be removed from disadvantages. --
uberpenguin @ 2006-06-10 21:47Z
@ 2006-06-11 03:50Z
@ 2006-12-02T00:30Z
@ 2006-12-02T16:03Z
Were the sections removed by 58.69.61.111 appropriate? Should the edit be reverted? Frankie
Hi,
I was thinking about this one for a while...
When Intel markets these "dual core" chips, such as Core Duo and Pentium D, are they really "dual core," much like two physical processors, and able to work concurrently, or are they similar to the the "HyperThreading" technology, where two logical processor cores are allocated for a single core, and then a secondary hardware thread is executed while the primary thread is stalled (in cache miss, branch misprediction, or data dependency)?
Thoughts?
Jdstroy 06:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
The "Pentium Dual Core" T2060 from the Core processor list is not mentioned anywhere in here. It is just a budget version of the Core Duo, right? Shouldn't it be part of this article, despite its name? And has Intel given any official reason for resurrecting the Pentium brand name for its budget version of the Core Duo? 205.157.110.11 04:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Reply: The Pentium Dual Core is a chip shrouded in mystery as Intel is not releasing much information. Some claim it is a dual core version of the Pentium M, some say it is a cheap Core Duo with less cache. Until Intel comes out with more information,I firmly beleive we should leave Pentium Dual Core as a seperate article with perhaps a reference in the Core 2 Duo article. My reasons are as follows: - Pentium Dual core architecture may be based on any type of chip from Pentium M to Pentium D or even Core Duo. Until firm evidence of what family of chip it is related to is produced, we should keep it separate. - The chip has many technical difference to the Core Duo line of chips and is aimed at a different market. - Intel uses a different brand name for the Pentium Dual Core. If Intel does not want to call it Core Duo, there must be a sizable difference between the Pentium Dual Core and the Core Duo, worthy of creating a whole new brand. Hotdog111 10:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
"Pentium Dual Core" is the non EM64T version of the Pentium D. The only one available, T2060, is NOT A CORE PROCESSOR and still uses the Netburst Architecture that Pentium 4 processors use. It's the same construction as a Pentium D: two cedar mill dies flipped in on each other on a LGA 775 socket. Source: http://www.intel.com/products/processor_number/proc_info_table.pdf 71.103.162.89 20:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Reason for creation: Intel's reason for creating the Pentium Dual Core branding was to get a cheap processor into developing country markets. The Pentium name was resurrected for this task because of the familiarity that the Pentium name holds. It was intended to be kept away from the US but PC manufacturers started wanting it for a low end option for their customers, in most cases using it to replace the Celeron M. Source: Conversations with several Intel employees regarding the creation of it.
I do not believe it should be merged because of the differences between the chips. I do however believe that there should be a link to it through the Intel Core page.
It sure would be nice to know more precisely what features these chips have. VT (I would guess not)? EM64T (highly unlikely)? According to the sparse datasheet from Intel it does have: Execute Disable Bit, Enhanced Intel SpeedStep, SSE2, SSE3. DHR 17:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://cn.tech.yahoo.com/070109/472/2oh88.html&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=1&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3DT2060%2Bcpu-z%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG That link is an English translation of a Chinese site that has English screenshots of the program CPU-Z being run on a Pentium Dual-Core T2060. Perhaps this will help show some of it's features.
The disambiguation at the top of the page is confusing. "Mobile processor" seems to imply something to be used in a cell phone, palmtop computer, or similar device. Basically I read that it was directing me to Intel Core (CPU architecture), itself a redirect, which then proceeded to tell me (indirectly of course) that I was reading the wrong article (I should have been reading this article, apparently). (I was looking for the article on the processor used by Apple.) —16:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Intel now refers to all Core 2, Core i5 and Core i7 CPUs as 'Intel Core' processors, and the pages for Xeon and Celeron (not Pentium though) are structured to give an overview over all product lines that are have mostly identical (Celeron M, Celeron D, Celeron Dual-Core) names but are based on different technologies.
I propose moving this (minus the introduction) page to Yonah (microprocessor) to preserve its history, and to start a new overview page for the brands, structured something like
Much of the information in such an article would of course be duplicated from the current Core 2/Core i5/Core i7 articles, so those could eventually be merged into this page. Arndbergmann ( talk) 08:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Article currently claims that the Core Duo was the world's first sub-25W dual core processor, and was launched in Jan 06. These claims seem doubtful to me, as I cannot find any source for this statement, and I can easily find earlier examples of multicore processors that appear to consume less than 25W (often significantly so), e.g. Asynchronous array of simple processors which appears to have used <1W for a 36-core chip. Also, while I can find no contemporary description including the power dissipation figure, BlueGene/L appears to have been built in 2004 based on dual-core nodes dissipating 17W each, AFAICT.
The author may have meant that it was the first x86-compatible dual core with this power consumption, but that is not what it says, and even this I can find no source for confirmation. 212.159.69.4 ( talk) 13:54, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Yonah (microprocessor). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:27, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Yonah (microprocessor). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:39, 20 July 2016 (UTC)