Intel Pentium J2900 - 2.67 GHz Quad Core

[monstercameron]

What is god awful is a bench that yield the same score for
a processor when running it at 1ghz and 1.48ghz.

Seriously.?.

the e1-1500 should be bobcat and the others jaguar, that should account for the score...

the problem is comparing a ~100W, decades old desktop processor to a 10W mobile part then bragging that its a little better in one metric :whiste:

 

[SPBHM]

the e1-1500 should be bobcat and the others jaguar, that should account for the score...

the problem is comparing a ~100W, decades old desktop processor to a 10W mobile part then bragging that its a little better in one metric :whiste:

I think his point was to compare a CPU considered by most to old and slow for anything to those new small "tablet x86 CPUs" some think are good enough for desktops

sure the power usage makes the newer CPU look good and the old garbage, but for a desktop it's not a big deal,

also try comparing it to a Celeron SU 2300 or something, power usage was not atrocious like the P4 era (10W + chipset), and it's what, 5 years old?

 

[Infraction Jack]

Anyone have a cinebench score for this cpu yet? I would also be interested in the score of an I5 downclocked to the speed of the Pentium J2900 for comparison.

 

[AtenRa]

A4-1250 = 8W TDP Jaguar
E1-2100 = 9W TDP Bobcat
A4-1200 = 3,9W TDP Jaguar
E1-1500 = 18W TDP Bobcat

Intel Pentium 4 540 = 84W TDP

Edit: All the above AMD APUs are thermally constrained being on thin Laptops and cannot produce 100% of their performance most of the time. Evidence is the A4-1200 3,9W TDP outperforms the 8W TDP A4-1250. Desktop Celerons/Pentiums and AMD AM1 CPUs will not have that problem, so wait for actual numbers from those SKUs and then compere.

 

[Arkaign]

A4-1250 = 8W TDP Jaguar
E1-2100 = 9W TDP Bobcat
A4-1200 = 3,9W TDP Jaguar
E1-1500 = 18W TDP Bobcat

Intel Pentium 4 540 = 84W TDP

Edit: All the above AMD APUs are thermally constrained being on thin Laptops and cannot produce 100% of their performance most of the time. Evidence is the A4-1200 3,9W TDP outperforms the 8W TDP A4-1250. Desktop Celerons/Pentiums and AMD AM1 CPUs will not have that problem, so wait for actual numbers from those SKUs and then compere.

The power consumption and being able to fit the E1 into netbook-sized boxes are definitely huge plusses.

The point though, is that that P4 is over ten years old for that level of desktop performance, and yet we have brand-new desktops being sold to this day that are slower in actual performance. I believe that will pass sometime soon hopefully, but I just can't accept it. I've dealt with them a few times, and the customers are always quite unhappy with them. Sure, it's their fault for not doing some basic research before spending $400+ on a piece of electronics, but that part has no business being in a consumer-targeted desktop. It's too slow.

That's probably not AMD's fault really.

Minimal desktop performance should be something in the line of a lowest-tier A6 imho. Maaaaybe an A4. The E1 is just abominable.

Someone with an archaic Athlon 64 X2 3800+, or a Pentium D 820, etc, from a decade back could decide 'hey, I need a new PC', go out, buy one of the E1 AIOs, and come away with a computer with LESS performance. Even more so if they're using a basic discrete card such as an old 5450 or something.

 

[VirtualLarry]

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Acer-Aspir...luded/34108706

Here's an Acer slimline PC, with a J1900 (dual-core, I think, right?), 4GB DDR3, 500GB HDD. $300.

How does that stack up compared to an entry-level AMD Athlon II X2 250 PC sold at Wallyworld a few years back?

It does seem like things are going backwards in performance, for what you pay for an entry-level rig these days at stores. No wonder people are getting turned off about desktop PCs.

I'm honestly surprised, that we haven't seen any PCs (well, I haven't, anyways) in stores, based on a NUC configuration. I would think that these "new style" mini-PCs would take off. Look at the success of the ChromeCast. Granted, that's in a much lower price-bracket than a NUC.

 

[Revolution 11]

Everything seems to be going down in quality, such as DVD players, my older DVD player could handle a 3 floor drop but my new one can't even fall off the TV stand without it falling apart.

Hamburgers getting smaller and more expensive while the older hamburgers are "reintroduced" with a higher price premium at a fast food chain, etc. The market is a dirty place.

Even those old god awful eMachines are better than these low end PC's.

This is just basic economics though. I would be more worried if this was not happening.

Here is a example. Say you are McDonalds and you sell a nice juicy hamburger for $1. It costs you $0.75 to make that burger and you keep the quarter as profit. Every customer who buys a burger is valuing the enjoyment of that burger at $1.

Now say your R&D guys show you a new burger that only costs $0.50 to make. However, the customer is 80% as satisfied as the old burger. This means the customer values the burger at $0.80. You sell the burger at $0.75.

Everyone wins here. You make the same $0.25 per burger but the raw cost of the burger has fallen by 33%. So your margins have improved. More importantly, the cheaper burger means you are selling tons more burgers, improving your marketshare. The customer is also happy because he is getting 5 cents of burger for free basically in consumer surplus.

This is what is happening to the tech industry. Stuff is getting cheaper and crappier but that is ok for 99% of the people because it improves both consumer and producer surplus. Everyone is either saving more money or making more of it, with the only downside being offending us techies.

 

[AtenRa]

The point though, is that that P4 is over ten years old for that level of desktop performance, and yet we have brand-new desktops being sold to this day that are slower in actual performance.

Well, the mistake here is that people take the High-End product of its time (in this case the Pentium 4 540) and compere it to the Entry level Low Power SKUs of today.
What was the entry level Low Power SKU at the time of Pentium 4 540 ?? A 900MHz ultra low voltage single core Celeron M 353 of 5W TDP. Compare that to 5W TDP Bobcat (which also has an iGPU) and see the difference.

For example, we currently have the 10W TDP ATOMs and 25W TDP Kabinis in the Entry level Low Power segment.
Pentium 540 supporting HT was released in June 2004. It was a single core with HT at 3.2GHz at 84W TDP.
The same month the Celeron D 320 2.4GHz was introduced. That was a single core 2.4GHz 73W CPU.

Current 10W/25W TDP SKUs will outperform all High-end 2004-2005 SKUs easily today.

What im saying is that after 10 years we have accomplished to have the same performance of the High-End SKU of its time but with 8x times lower power.
For people that doesnt care about that low power usage or the Small Form Factor platform, you can have an entry level SKU that is faster and consume less than those Pentium 4.
And since both AMD and Intel are investing in Low Power CPUs, that segment will outperform even more high-end CPUs of recent years from now on.

 

[Abwx]

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Acer-Aspir...luded/34108706

Here's an Acer slimline PC, with a J1900 (dual-core, I think, right?), 4GB DDR3, 500GB HDD. $300.

That s a 4 cores 2.41GHz, the corresponding 2C is the J1800 2.58GHz.

 

[VirtualLarry]

That s a 4 cores 2.41GHz, the corresponding 2C is the J1800 2.58GHz.

That's not quite as bad as I thought then. Hmm, entry-level 10W quad-core for $300. Not horrible, not great. For those that consider quad-core to be a marketing point, it's much easier to reach that point with an Atom, than a Core CPU, price-wise.

 

[shree]

I've ordered the ASRocks combo motherboard with J2900. Cost me $103. Now in shipping. I'm planning to stuff it in this http://www.ebay.in/itm/Mini-ITX-Cab...-ATX-PSU-Thin-Client-Compact-PC-/170991119703

But I'm not sure if all the screws will fit. So not ordered the box yet.

 

[jihe]

I keep wondering what an unlocked baytrail cpu would clock to.

 

[Lyfer]

good to know. I wasn't looking to buy one, just noticed it while killing a lunch break as there is a future shop across the street from my office.

http://www.futureshop.ca/en-ca/prod...63e63b9a8ecfeb75e1666b7en02&searchpageindex=1

that is an example desktop i saw.

omg intel hd graphix.

 

[JDG1980]

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Acer-Aspir...luded/34108706

Here's an Acer slimline PC, with a J1900 (dual-core, I think, right?), 4GB DDR3, 500GB HDD. $300.

How does that stack up compared to an entry-level AMD Athlon II X2 250 PC sold at Wallyworld a few years back?

Celeron J1900 is quad-core. Anandtech's Bench page shows it losing pretty badly to the Athlon X2 255 in a single-thread benchmark, but holding its own in well-multithreaded apps.

 

[Matt1970]

its probably baytrail and is equivalent to a core 2 duo or amd k8 athlon.

Seems to be. PassMark ranks it at 2058 which is about the same as an E8300.

 

[cbn]

it's cheaper to make, and people are going to be happy buying a quad core and not those "ancient" and slow dual cores like the G1820, right?

win!

I've been wondering if we see this trend reverse on 14nm though.

quad core airmont atom + 16EUs + integrated PCH should actually be bigger than a dual core broadwell GT1 (though the Broadwell needs a separate PCH the Braswell SOC won't need to have).

Of course this speaks nothing of ASPs, just chips sizes.

 

[witeken]

@cbn

 

[cbn]

it's cheaper to make, and people are going to be happy buying a quad core and not those "ancient" and slow dual cores like the G1820, right?

win!

I've been wondering if we see this trend reverse on 14nm though.

quad core airmont atom + 16EUs + integrated PCH should actually be bigger than a dual core broadwell GT1 (though the Broadwell needs a separate PCH the Braswell SOC won't need to have).

Of course this speaks nothing of ASPs, just chips sizes.

@cbn

@witeken,

I'm sure the Braswell SOC will be lower cost than Bay Trail due to 14nm xtors, but Broadwell Celeron GT1 should be even lower cost still because it also benefits from 14nm.

 

[cbn]

While looking up information on Haswell die variations, I did not find any mention of a specific dual core GT1 die (as we saw with Ivy Bridge).

However, even if all dual cores were GT2 with Broadwell by my estimates the die size on 14nm would still be roughly the same as Braswell....and maybe even a little smaller.

Therefore, I believe this calls into question the value of Braswell for Desktop.

What processor would you rather have for your economy desktop? An atom quad core 16 EU SOC or a dual big core 24EU chip (plus PCH on a separate chip)?

 

[witeken]

You're looking at die size. The slide I posted is about total platform cost, which will be a lot less with Broxton.

 

[cbn]

You're looking at die size. The slide I posted is about total platform cost, which will be a lot less with Broxton.

Platform cost will also drop with Broadwell Dual core.

I guess my point is that while Bay Trail SOC (102mm on 22nm) was a good deal smaller compared to Haswell dual core (130mm on 22nm as GT2 --> http://www.anandtech.com/show/7744/intel-reveals-new-haswell-details-at-isscc-2014), I don't believe the same relationship will be true for Braswell vs. Broadwell.

This due to a greater bloating of the die on Braswell from iGPU relative to iGPU the increase seen with Broadwell dual core GT2 die. (Braswell gains 12 EUs over Bay Trail vs. only four EU gain for Broadwell GT2 over Haswell GT2).

Furthermore, the 14nm xtors on Broadwell will clock much higher than the mobile optimized 14nm xtors on Braswell. So even though the Braswell Platform may be slightly lower cost (due to not needing a PCH), the value per xtor will probably be much higher with Broadwell Dual core GT2.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Platform cost will also drop with Broadwell Dual core.

I guess my point is that while Bay Trail SOC (102mm on 22nm) was a good deal smaller compared to Haswell dual core (130mm on 22nm as GT2 --> http://www.anandtech.com/show/7744/intel-reveals-new-haswell-details-at-isscc-2014), I don't believe the same relationship will be true for Braswell vs. Broadwell.

This due to a greater bloating of the die on Braswell from iGPU relative to iGPU the increase seen with Broadwell dual core GT2 die. (Braswell gains 12 EUs over Bay Trail vs. only four EU gain for Broadwell GT2 over Haswell GT2).

Furthermore, the 14nm xtors on Broadwell will clock much higher than the mobile optimized 14nm xtors on Braswell. So even though the Braswell Platform may be slightly lower cost (due to not needing a PCH), the value per xtor will probably be much higher with Broadwell Dual core GT2.

Braswell platform will also likely command a much lower surrounding component bill of materials, so keep this in mind.

 

[cbn]

I'm honestly surprised, that we haven't seen any PCs (well, I haven't, anyways) in stores, based on a NUC configuration. I would think that these "new style" mini-PCs would take off. Look at the success of the ChromeCast. Granted, that's in a much lower price-bracket than a NUC.

I like the NUC concept of being simple and not cluttered with wires and cables, but fact remains NUC just doesn't offer anything tangible compared to a ULV latop.

In fact, the Bay Trail NUC only has one SATA port compared to the two SATA ports found in most Bay Trail-M laptops. So, in some cases, NUC is even a backwards step compared to laptops.

Instead I would like to see cleaner/simpler/sleeker "NUC style desktops" be a large improvement in performance compared to laptops. Maybe this could be accomplished by making a bigger NUC while still keeping the simple and sleek layout (eg, true desktop TDP processor with multiple M.2 drives, etc)

 

[Techhog]

http://ark.intel.com/products/78868/Intel-Pentium-Processor-J2900-2M-Cache-up-to-2_67-GHz

See some cheap PC's at Best Buy using this Processor. Never heard of it before. Assuming its OEM.

Wonder how it performs? Is it haswell? TDP is only 10w !

Protip: Look int the "Related Products" box if you want to find a CPU's architecture.

 

[cbn]

Maybe for the larger NUC style Desktop, it could be based on a larger PCB with the following specs:

1. Broadwell GT2 desktop full TDP processor.

2. Four M.2 Ultra (making good use of the desktop processor's 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes)

3. Maybe even throw in thunderbolt II or whatever comes after that (since they desktop has so many M.2 ultra slots). Fast SSDs call for a fast I/O for data transfers.

^^^^ Something like that is definitely a big jump up from what is possible on a ULV laptop.