Intel to release energy-efficient Core i5 CPUs

[AuDioFreaK39]

Intel to release energy-efficient Core i5 CPUs

Q1 2010


Just recently, Intel announced the introduction of three new energy-efficient quad cores for its Core 2 lineup - Q8200s, Q9400s, and Q9500s with 65w TDP. Later this year in August or September, the company intends to launch its 45nm Lynnfield Core i5 processors, based on socket LGA1156. Moreover, these initial models will carry a TDP of 95w.

In Q1 2010, Intel plans to release complementing energy-efficient 65w TDP models. The primary focus behind this is not only to bring down the energy consumption of the CPUs, but also to enable quad core scalability for 65w optimized platforms. In effect, this will bring more low power, high performance cores to the small form factor, notebook, and all-in-one market segments.

On another note, the low-power Core i5 processors are expected to enter the market in Q1 2010 at prices higher than their standard counterparts.


No self promotion


esquared
Anandtech Senior Moderator


VR-Zone has a chart on this as well:

http://resources.vr-zone.com//...500/LP_Lynnfield_2.jpg

 

[VirtualLarry]

Are Core i5s dual-core or quad-core chips?

 

[AuDioFreaK39]

quad core Nehalem chips.

 

[SlowSpyder]

So Core i5 is a different socket? Is that replacing the current i7 socket, or are they to coexist?

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
So Core i5 is a different socket? Is that replacing the current i7 socket, or are they to coexist?

Co-exist is the current expectation.

What strikes me as a little odd with this timeline is that it places Intel in the position of still releasing entirely new 45nm SKU's amidst a supposed transition to 32nm.

Intel has gone on record stating they see the drive to 32nm as a necessity to ensure gross margins stay high during the prospects of a prolonged downturn...if mainstream lower cost CPU's like the i5 are going to be all the more sensitive to die-size and yields.

In other words Intel should be releasing 32nm mainstream Westmere chips in Q1 2010 with their smaller die and cheaper production costs, not 45nm behemoth chips with lower yields and higher production costs.

Unless, contrary to all reports to date, Intel intends to slip 32nm 6-9 months and not release Westmere until 2H 2010. Doing that would delay Intel upfront capex costs of around $2-3B for a good 9 months, which could offset the gross margin difference between 45nm i5's and their smaller 32nm counter-parts.

I'm not sure what the real story is here, but something is just not quite right about all this at the moment. You don't release large-die on a cost-sensitive SKU in the middle of downturn when you have a smaller more efficient node nearly in-hand. And yet that is precisely what these reports are purporting Intel is going to do...

 

[zenguy]

Releasing the "Lower Wattage" CPUs make alot of sense.

#1 - They can sell them for more.
#2 - They are in essense the same CPUs, but likely just cherry-picked ones that operate on lower voltage.

The truth is, their "non-low power" counterparts are already using that little power with the stated TDP quite a bit in excess.

 

[coldpower27]

I dunno it doesn't state what process these are to be released on, maybe the Q1 2010 version at 65W are 32nm Westmeres for LGA1156. While the older 95W version remain on the older node. Lynnfield should be simpler then Bloomfield, I hope.... and not be too gargantuan a die.

So I think maybe... Q4 2009-> Bloomfield - Westmere for LGA1366, Q1 2010 -> Westmere (65W) LGA1156... and then finally maybe in late Q1 or early Q2 the more power hungry 95W Lynnfield get shifted to 32nm as well..

It would be inline with what Intel does right now. The Higher end SKU's get shifted to 45nm first from 65nm, First Core 2 Extreme, then things like Core 2 Quad and higher end Core 2 Duo's then middle and low end COre 2 and Pentium Dual Core, and finally and last of all the Celerons..

 

[PCTC2]

This is similar to their Q9XX0s and Q9XX0e parts. They're the lower wattage versions of mainstream chips with a nice price premium over their high wattage counterparts. So after the i5 has been around for a bit, the cherry picked ones can be sold as "energy efficient" with a price premium as they transition the mainstream chips to 32nm.

 

[hans007]

Originally posted by: coldpower27
I dunno it doesn't state what process these are to be released on, maybe the Q1 2010 version at 65W are 32nm Westmeres for LGA1156. While the older 95W version remain on the older node. Lynnfield should be simpler then Bloomfield, I hope.... and not be too gargantuan a die.

So I think maybe... Q4 2009-> Bloomfield - Westmere for LGA1366, Q1 2010 -> Westmere (65W) LGA1156... and then finally maybe in late Q1 or early Q2 the more power hungry 95W Lynnfield get shifted to 32nm as well..

It would be inline with what Intel does right now. The Higher end SKU's get shifted to 45nm first from 65nm, First Core 2 Extreme, then things like Core 2 Quad and higher end Core 2 Duo's then middle and low end COre 2 and Pentium Dual Core, and finally and last of all the Celerons..

Intel almost never does that. WHy keep any plants on the old node when they can use the cheaper newer node. They tend to switch over as fast as they can for that reason.

I agree though a quad core i7 or i5 chip isa pretty big die , sometihngl ike 260 mm^2 when a core 2 quad is smaller in general (the 6mb quads are only 180 or so, and the 12mb probably 270 with better yields since its 2 chips).

I wonder if intel will make a cut down quad like the amd propus. If people care more about having "quad core" than the ultimate speed the propus at 140mm^2 with no l3 cache might do ok.