Motherboard Forums


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

Celeron 1.3GHz, and other Q'a

 
 
zxcvbob
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-15-2004, 04:34 AM
Are all socket 370 Celeron 1.2G and 1.3G processors based on the Tualatin
core? I'm looking for a not-too-expensive CPU and motherboard (micro-ATX
or flex-ATX format) too build a very quiet, low wattage PC. Some of the
ads I see say "coppermine" core.

I think the Celeron M processors and boards are gonna take a while to hit
the market and drop in price.

Can anyone recommend a good small formfactor motherboard for this processor
that has onboard audio, video, lan, and USB2? All the mobos I've looked at
say the have USB but don't give the specifications.

I assume all the AMD socket A processors are too hot-running for a project
like this. From what I can tell, the mobile processors use just as much
power as desktop processors unless you get an ultra-low-voltage processor
and the mobo can supply the correct voltage.

Best regards,
Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Robert Myers
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-15-2004, 07:16 PM
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 23:34:24 -0500, zxcvbob <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Are all socket 370 Celeron 1.2G and 1.3G processors based on the Tualatin
>core? I'm looking for a not-too-expensive CPU and motherboard (micro-ATX
>or flex-ATX format) too build a very quiet, low wattage PC. Some of the
>ads I see say "coppermine" core.
>

If it's a 1.2G or 1.3G, it's a Tualatin.

>I think the Celeron M processors and boards are gonna take a while to hit
>the market and drop in price.
>
>Can anyone recommend a good small formfactor motherboard for this processor
>that has onboard audio, video, lan, and USB2? All the mobos I've looked at
>say the have USB but don't give the specifications.
>

I could be wrong, but I think you're out of luck looking for USB2 to
go with a Tualatin. AFAIK, no one is making Tualatin motherboards.
You can find them, but you have to scrounge. If you need USB2 and
low-wattage, you can either go with a PCI card for USB2 or mobile
Pentium4-M, only a few watts more. The motherboard is inexpensive,
but the CPU definitely isn't. Make sure you get mobile pentium 4-_M_,
check out electrical characteristics at users.erols.com and make sure
you get a m'board that will support a lower vcore.

>I assume all the AMD socket A processors are too hot-running for a project
>like this. From what I can tell, the mobile processors use just as much
>power as desktop processors unless you get an ultra-low-voltage processor
>and the mobo can supply the correct voltage.
>

I've cross posted your question and my response to
comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips so one of the local amdroids can tell
both of us how clueless we are for even thinking of buying an Intel
processor. ;-).

RM


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tony Hill
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-16-2004, 06:19 AM
On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 15:16:07 -0400, Robert Myers <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
>>I assume all the AMD socket A processors are too hot-running for a project
>>like this. From what I can tell, the mobile processors use just as much
>>power as desktop processors unless you get an ultra-low-voltage processor
>>and the mobo can supply the correct voltage.
>>

>I've cross posted your question and my response to
>comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips so one of the local amdroids can tell
>both of us how clueless we are for even thinking of buying an Intel
>processor. ;-).


Yup, totally clueless! :>

Actually the assumption above is not entirely correct. Not only are
there some rather low powered AMD AthlonXP chips (they have pretty
similar power consumption to the Pentium-M and lower power consumption
than the P4-M), but also mobile chips do NOT use the same amount of
power as desktop chips, even at the same voltage.

A lot of power requirements can be tuned during the manufacturing
process. For high-end desktop chips the fabs are usually tuned for
high clock speeds. For low-end/low cost chips they are tuned for high
yields. For mobile chips they are tuned for low power.

The end result is that an AthlonXP 1700+ and an AthlonXP-M 1700+ could
have quite different power consumption figures, even if they are run
at the same voltage and at least superficially produced on the same
fab (ie both "Thoroughbred" cores made on a 130nm process). In fact,
AMD actually sells *THREE* AthlonXP-M 2000+ processors, all with
different power consumption figures. That's in addition to the old
AthlonXP (desktop) 2000+ chips that are no longer being sold.

Intel does pretty much the same thing with their P4 chips. The
desktop Pentium4, the "Mobile Pentium 4" and the "Mobile Pentium 4-M"
are all produced from the same basic die on superficially the same
process, but that process is tuned for different parameters and the
resulting power consumption figures for those chips is different. For
example, a desktop P4 2.4GHz has a Thermal Design Power (TDP) ranging
from 57.1W to 66.2W, depending on the model. The Mobile P4 2.4GHz
had a TDP of 59.8W, while the Mobile P4-M 2.4GHz has a TDP of either
30W or 35W.


For AMD's chips, I seem to recall that they defined a TDP of 60W for
all of their AthlonXP-M "Desktop Replacement" chips, while they
defined a TDP of 45W for all of their AthlonXP-M "Mainstream" chips
and 25W for their AthlonXP-M "Low power" chips. The problem with AMD
chips is that their documentation is absolutely abysmal when it comes
to mobile chips. I have no idea if it's even possible to tell a "Low
Power" chip from a "Desktop Replacement" chip (aside from the fact
that the fastest "Low Power" chip is a 2100+ model while the "Desktop
Replacement" parts go up to 2800+).

The main advantage to the AMD chips is two fold. First is that they
are all socket A chips, so you can drop them in any old Socket A
motherboard. Many of the mobile Intel chips come in all sorts of
custom sockets designed specifically for laptops. The second
advantage to AMD's line is that they are widely available. You'll
have a HELL of a time finding any mobile Intel chips, but mobile AMD
chips are sold from most of the bigger on-line vendors these days.
I'm fairly certain that the chips being sold are "Mainstream"
AthlonXP-M chips, but as mentioned above, it's damn near impossible to
tell them apart.


In the end though, when you get right down to it, the original idea
was probably the best. A "Tualatin" Celeron chip combined with a PCI
USB2 card should be the ticket. They consume about 30W of power,
should be fairly cheap and not all that difficult to find. You might
actually be able to find a Socket 370 board from VIA with USB2 built
in. Since VIA is still producing Socket 370 processors they are also
producing current Socket 370 motherboards. However given that a PCI
USB2 card should only cost you $10 or so, it's probably worth buying
one and sticking it in an Intel-based motherboard rather than
bothering with VIA chipsets and the odd-ball problems that all too
often accompanies said chipsets.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Celeron M 1.5 gHz versus Celeron 2.4 gHz Danny Laptops 4 08-07-2006 09:38 PM
Other options other than Entourage for email cline on Mac OS X (Tiger or Panther) pointed to an Exchange Server Davidaarong Apple 6 03-14-2006 01:26 AM
Celeron D compatibility with Celeron Jim Intel 3 09-26-2004 01:21 PM
BUY starbucks coffee canada and pike place and other cards COFFEE_CARDS_STARBUCKS Laptops 0 01-23-2004 04:20 PM
celeron or mobile celeron? Yeuk Laptops 3 07-07-2003 12:00 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:13 PM.


Welcome!
Welcome to Motherboard Point
 

Advertisment