Intel plans to update its line of low-cost, low-power chips for entry-level laptop and mini-desktop computers early next year. While official details haven’t been released yet, FanlessTech has obtained specs for Intel’s upcoming Jasper Lake processor lineup.

The new chips are follow-ups to the Gemini Lake Refresh processors released in late 2019, and they feature Intel’s new 10nm Tremont CPU cores, which the company says should bring up to a 30-percent performance boost over the previous generation.

According to FanlessTech, here’s an overview of the first Jasper Lake chips scheduled to launch in early 2021:

Cores / ThreadsBase / BoostCacheTDP
Pentium Silver N60054 / 42 GHz / 3.3 GHz4MB L210W
Celeron N51054 / 42 GHz / 2.8 GHz4MB L210W
Celeron N45052 / 22 GHz / 2.9 GHz4MB L210W
Pentium Silver N60004 / 41.1 GHz / 3.1 GHz4MB L26W
Celeron N51004 / 41.1 GHz / 2.8 GHz4MB L26W
Celeron N45002 / 21.1 GHz / 2.8 GHz4MB L26W

While Intel is already producing Tremont cores, they’re currently only used in the company’s Lakefield processor which combines four low-power Tremont/Atom CPU cores with a single high-performance Intel Sunny Cove processor core and Intel Iris graphics.

But Lakefield is reserved for premium thin and light laptops and 2-in-1s like the Samsung Galaxy Book S.

Jasper Lake chips are lower-performance processors with Intel UHD graphics (rather than Iris), and without the Sunny Cove CPU cores. These chips will most likely be used in entry-level computers when they ship early next year.

Support Liliputing

Liliputing's primary sources of revenue are advertising and affiliate links (if you click the "Shop" button at the top of the page and buy something on Amazon, for example, we'll get a small commission).

But there are several ways you can support the site directly even if you're using an ad blocker* and hate online shopping.

Contribute to our Patreon campaign

or...

Contribute via PayPal

* If you are using an ad blocker like uBlock Origin and seeing a pop-up message at the bottom of the screen, we have a guide that may help you disable it.

Join the Conversation

11 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. I developed some confusing ideas about the “Atom” families over the years.

    Initially it was launched to bring intel on palm/pocket (I mean netbook/mobile).

    After the failure was imminent, they themselves became confuse about the name “Atom”, what to do with that ! They started launching some “Atom” SoC/CPU under the time-tested brands “Celeron” & “Pentium” to confuse people more !

    Then they also started launching multi-core server CPU under that “Atom” family !

    And, here folks are interested about gaming with “Atom” !

    My questions are:
    1. Why the big OEM/Vendors like HP/Dell/Asus/Acer/Lenovo etc are not so vocal about these products ? Varieties are also reducing (to null) years after year !

    Why there are so much (unsolvable) errata ? Specially painful are those related to storage handling. I can not trust these, these are like extra, right.

  2. I’ve still got my dell venue 8 pro running windows 10 on an atom processor and since it’s so portable, I use it for some of my old favorite PC games. I have it in an all in one combination keyboard / touchpad case running separately with a steel series bluetooth / usb controller and I play games like doom 3, fallout 3, need for speed most wanted, carbon and undercover on the road. All run surprisingly well and don’t kill the battery life the way you would think. For something that came out in 2014, the game potential has shocked me on what an old atom processor is capable of. The holy grail for me would be to get something as compact to run the mass effect trilogy along with the dead space series on an atom processor. I wonder how close a device with a jasper processor in it will come to achieving that. I don’t want to go down the gpd win max road for this, but if I can run those 2004, 2005, 2006 type pc games on a a 2014 device as small as the venue pro, then surely a 2012 game like mass effect three could run on a 2021 Jasper processor. At least that’s what I’m guessing. Games are all graphic dependant and I don’t know if a 2021 CPU Atom has advanced the GPU enough to play a 2012 PC game. I know there are other windows devices out there. There’s just something that appeals to me in playing old xbox 360 on a small device. The GPD Win max would probably play all these games and more, but it’s a little too rich for my blood right now

  3. I like this! For people who don’t play the most demanding games and don’t compute rocket science.
    Intel this time (1st time?) has some competition from AMD:
    https://liliputing.com/2020/08/amd-brings-zen-architecture-to-entry-level-6w-laptop-processors.html

    And some competition from ARM approaching on Atoms teritory.

    I believed N is for mobile and J for desktop (marketing) although N/mobile ends up in desktop, J/desktop never ends up in mobile.
    Correct me if I’m wrong.

    1. Historically that is correct. But N usually also means 6 watts or less, while J means 10 watts. So these names are… weird. Maybe Intel is erasing the distinction and calling everything N this time around?

      1. Intel seems to want names to be as confusing as possible, but there have always been systems that used desktop chips for mobile and visa versa. I guess removing the distinction leaves it up to the vendors.

  4. I wonder why Intel can’t think outside the Atom box and develop a hexacore or octacore celeron or pentium processors.

    Also, are the the first 3 processors misspelled with a leading N instead of J or did Intel decide the names of the previous gen wasn’t confusing and decided to up the confusion game.

    1. I wondered the same thing about the N and J names, but this is what FanlessTech is reporting, and Olivier is pretty consistently accurate with his leaks.

    2. There’s too many reasons why they don’t. The most important reasons are Cost and Technical limitations of the architecture.

      The more cores you have on a single die, the more complex the entire design is. With increased complexity comes an increase in the statistical number of manufactured chips that will be rejected by QA due to manufacturing errors. This increases the cost of the product overall. These costs are acceptable on their “Core” product line, but not for chips that are going to be sold for much less.

      Also, the number of unique circuit designs that need to be made increases. All 2-core chips use the same die design, all 4-core chips use the same die design. Adding an additional die design increases design, manufacturing, and QA costs.

      Intel has made 8 core Atom chips in the past. The Intel Avoton lineup were 8 core Atom products made in 2013 with a TDP of 20w, and they offered terrible performance compared to even 2 core Intel Core-series chips.

      The performance was equal to a 15w Haswell 2-core i5-4310U from the same year.

      The limitation is that the architecture of Atom chips just don’t have complex enough bus interfaces to support that number of cores. There is a diminishing return on the addition of more cores when there aren’t supporting systems capable of managing it.

    3. The server targeted Atoms go up to 24 cores.

      In any case, why would a consumer non-server device need that many slow running Atom cores?

  5. I wonder if GPD will make a MicroPC 2 with one of these. Or maybe they’ll use a Core CPU but I guess that would put the price range outside original target market.