My two cents to the discussion:
- It seems a chip built from the scratch for mobile. It packs a lot of punch, both in graphics and CPU power, all that in a power sipping power envelope. In
- I'm kinda impressed by the top iris part. 70-80% of the GT650 + Quad Core Haswell in a 47W power envelope.It will be nice for very small form factors.
Trinity is about 30% faster, Richland performance increase is negligible. Note that these were tested on high settings (where hostorically intel doesn't do well) where almost every single game tested was unplayable even at 1280 x 800.
Hang on, how comes they have Richland data already?
It would not surprise me at all if Broadwell had a SKU which included a true on-die L4$.
At least not with 128MB, this is too big. Broadwell should be very interesting nevertheless. Intel told Broadwell will improve graphics by a bigger margin than Haswell.I asked about the potential to integrate eDRAM on-die, but was told that it’s far too early for that discussion. Given the size of the 128MB eDRAM on 22nm (~84mm^2), I can understand why. Intel did float an interesting idea by me though. In the future it could integrate 16 - 32MB of eDRAM on-die for specific use cases (e.g. storing the frame buffer).
True but on so many forums I read Sandy Bridge and Ivy bridge users being told to wait for the glorious Haswell. Not even that good... Even the high original core series is still excellent.Nah, it'd be tough to beat those first P4's, which were actually slower that the P3's they replaced!
I would be surprised.
At least not with 128MB, this is too big. Broadwell should be very interesting nevertheless. Intel told Broadwell will improve graphics by a bigger margin than Haswell.
It would not surprise me at all if Broadwell had a SKU which included a true on-die L4$.
42mm^2 die-adder at 14nm is not all that much. Besides, any argument one would make for why they'd keep the 128MB cache a discrete IC using MCM could have been equally applied to the discrete iGPU IC that was fabricated with 45nm...and yet they went ahead and put it all on-die anyways.
I get the impression that the plan might be to keep the eDRAM on a n-1 process going forward. When Intel moves to 14nm with Broadwell, its entirely possible that Crystalwell will remain at 22nm.
I have a SB-based laptop now, and IB-based desktops (plus FX8350) now...Haswell makes me want to upgrade my laptop. It seems perfect for that marketspace, which for the consumer demographic is >50% marketshare of units shipped so it really is not rocket science that Intel had Haswell focus on the mobile aspects.
Crystalwell with its MCM approach to getting L4 cache into the socket reminds me so much of Clarkdale which was their first foray into getting the IGP on-die (first step was getting it on-package, same as crystalwell and its L4$).
42mm^2 die-adder at 14nm is not all that much. Besides, any argument one would make for why they'd keep the 128MB cache a discrete IC using MCM could have been equally applied to the discrete iGPU IC that was fabricated with 45nm...and yet they went ahead and put it all on-die anyways.
Intel has always used MCM packaging as its stepping stone for transitioning to an all-on-die solution. Just look at the history of its MCM products, it has always been a gateway product to putting it all on-die. Why would they stop now?
Especially with something that scales stupidly well (in both yields and die-size) as cache.
Link? Based on all Ivy vs Sandy comparisons I have process scaling was 1,5.
And did you provide a link before throwing your 1.5 ratio.?.
I got the number from SB/IB comparisons.....
That is one of the worst reviews i have seen.
I think this would be a good time for current C2D, Phenom II or Core i7 first gen owners to upgrade. 2nd and 3rd gen owners can probaly skip this gen from what I am seeing. I am the only guy that is tired of going from a quad to another quad then another quad
It also shows that at least for the rest of 2013, iGPU will continue to be basically worthless for gaming, unless you're going for a dirt cheap notebook to play stripped settings on, or Angry Birds.
Other way around because of the integrated VRM and upgraded iGPU.Lesser TDP
The chip should output fewer watts and have a larger die size to do so .. By those means alone and other things being equal, it should run cooler than equivalent IVB
NopeIs the iGPU used as a "cooler" when disabled?
There will be minimal difference, if anything at all in the first place.Will the iGPU-less parts run cooler?
Ah, that sucks. Wouldn't that be cool.Nope There will be minimal difference, if anything at all in the first place.