Intel’s Bay Trail chips are low-power processors based on Silvermont architecture. The first chips launched in late 2013, and for the first time Intel was using the same technology for some of its Atom, Celeron, and Pentium chips aimed at tablets and notebooks.

Later this year Bay Trail will give way to Cherry Trail… but Intel’s not done with Silvermont just yet. The company has at least 4 new chips in the works, offering slightly higher clock speeds than their predecessors.

bay trail logo

CPU World reports that the Intel Celeron N2808 and N2840 dual-core chips and Celeron N2940 and Pentium N3540 quad-core chips are due out in the second quarter of 2014.

They’ll replace earlier chips including the N2807, N2830, N2930, and N3530 processors.

Like their predecessors, the new chips are low-power processors designed to offer moderate performance and long battery life. The N2808 has a TDP of just 4.3 watts, while the other new chips use 7.5 watts.

What’s new is support for higher maximum burst speeds… which means that the new chips shouldn’t use any more power than the processors they replace, but they should offer up to 7 percent better CPU performance or 6 percent faster graphics performance under certain circumstances.

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


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.

Subscribe to Liliputing via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 9,550 other subscribers

3 replies on “4 more “Bay Trail” Celeron and Pentium chips incoming”

  1. Why 40 models of SOC for mobile/Tablets?. I am starting to hate this excessive segmentation, with differences of only Mghz between some SOC models. One thing I like about ARM chips, even with a good number or SOC makers, is that there are only a few core models (being the main ones A7, A9, A9r4, A12, A15, A17, A53, A57, with their Qualcomm name variants), and GPU models (even counting the cores from ARM, Qualcomm, Vivante and Imagination Techs) and it is relatively easy to know how powerful and battering efficient a device is going to be just by knowing its components.

    I like Intel for its open source approach (so I can install Linux), but I really dislike how their tablets/mobiles are limited to mostly 1GB, and just a few to only 2GB. It is so widespread that it looks like as if Intel is on purpose limiting the builders to put more RAM to avoid competing with the desktop and laptop models.

    1. Uh, nope… It’s the system makers… Except for phones the limit is actually 4GB for tablets and up to 8GB for everything else…

      While ARM is far more fragmented… They don’t always tell you but there are multiple variants and different levels of custom configurations for just about every single model… And it’s a lot more confusing than the few Intel variants they release… At least Intel usually provides different model numbers to tell them apart…

    2. I think you’re a little confused. There’s alot more that happens behind the scenes with ARM chips than you think. Saying A7, A9, A17 is not the same thing as saying i5-4770. Those are just the Cortex-A architecture groups. It’s like saying 286, 486, 586, etc.

Comments are closed.