So they can show nice little graphs that show it sips power most of the time but still does well in benchmarks. Never mind that you could just design the higher powered cores to downclock and get a similar affect. Its not like a mobile where chip size and heat really matters. It shows they only care about laptops where this might be more useful.Originally Posted by Tabbykatze
Another socket change so soon after LGA1200? Must be frustrating for those who recently upgraded to 400's boards.
Intel desktop consumer socket CPUs,are technically APUs made for laptops,ie,why they have an IGP. So the core arrangement makes more sense for a laptop.
Recent intel sockets haven't had an excess of pins (e.g. AM4 has 1331), so more pins than 1200 is reasonable. I don't know why they would need an extra 500 though - a full 16x PCIe slot only needs 64 pins to carry the data.
This is another nail in the coffin of 10th gen though - reheated skylake again, on a platform it can't properly use, is just a thinly veiled attempt to get us to buy two £500 CPUs in short order
I guess having some lower power cores for background tasks will free up thermal headroom to run the cores doing useful work to boost that little bit higher? Definitely a solution looking for problems in desktop
ETA: I was wondering how the consumed energy (and therefore CO2 emissions) is balanced between use and manufacture of a computer, turns out it's probably dominated by the manufacture (62-70%):
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...801?via%3Dihub
The study is quite old, but a cursory google can't find anything more recent. Based on this, I bet the extra CO2 emissions from manufacturing the extra die area for the low power cores outweighs any potential savings
Last edited by Xlucine; 01-07-2020 at 09:53 PM.
Interesting to see the big jump in pin count - if that means a physically larger socket then pretty much every cooler on the market won't fit anymore, unless the pin pitch can be reduced.
For AMD, that's true.
Not the case on Intel platforms starting with Sandy Bridge, match chipset with socket and you're good to go with very few exceptions (the 2 Desktop Broadwell CPUs weren't supported on original X87 Haswell boards but they still got Devil's Canyon/Haswell Refresh and you could argue that 1151 v1 & v2 being the same socket). On AMD that is definitely not the case. That and every non-F CPU (and every pre-9th gen CPU) also has an iGPU.
I've read a few articles (possibly on Hexus, possibly elsewhere) that Intel's rational behind a socket refresh every 2 years is to avoid the situation that AMD had to deal with last month with Zen3 on B450 boards. People may not like it from an upgrade standpoint but the logic is solid in that it's harder to make mistake on buying a CPU that fits the socket but a motherboard with an unsupported chipset.
Ultimately it comes down to how often users are likely to want to swap out a CPU on an existing motherboard. For me, it's irrelevant as I usually only upgrade my CPU in 5 year cycles so a motherboard upgrade is pretty much mandatory regardless of platform choice. I get that most users on Hexus are far more likely to upgrade CPU on a regular basis and so CPU upgrade paths are more important, just saying that it's not crucial for everyone (and I'm guessing that for most businesses they'd just swap out the whole PC)
A joke that they're doing the same thing that they've done since 2011? It's arguably easier to plan ahead knowing what you're getting into, whereas AMD seem to be totally unprepared for the backlash over Zen3 support on B450.
That and with Ice Lake having only just been launched, Rocket Lake CPUs most likely won't launch until next year and will work on current gen motherboards, just like every pair of CPU generations since Sandy Bridge (except Broadwell). Alder Lake doesn't make sense until 2022.
Like I said, it's a clear strategy and there's not bait & switch. e.g. if you buy a 10600K now and upgrade to a 11700K (assuming that's what Intel calls the i7 Rocket Lake CPU) then it will work with a BIOS update - but a hypothetical 12800K will need a new motherboard. AMD seem to be going down the route of allowing current and 2 future CPU gens per chipset on a rolling basis, so long as the socket doesn't change - it's more flexible but not as much as people ted to make out.
See above - it's been this way on Intel for nearly 10 years and it's clear how they operate.
There's a fair bit of space between the socket and the holes on LGA1XXX, they probably could stick with the same mounting holes if they tried. Most coolers also support LGA2011, so at worst it'd just be a case of getting the new mounting bracket for the vast majority of coolers
Helpful
So thats 500 extra pins? 484 for data processing and 16 reserved for the CIA.
Intel used Tremont cores in their P5900 family, with new instructions to reduce latency of datapath acceleration. I wonder if these Gracemont Atom cores will be used in the same way, which would make sense if Intel is truly thinking the future is higher speed edge connections to remote Exascale processing.
Intel also envisions increased use of parallel heterogeneous multi-core processing, with local GPU/NNP/FPGA accelerators. This might similarly make use of atom cores for DDIO.
It will be interesting to see what Intel has planned, since Alder Lake is described as being the high performance application of their hybrid technology vs the low power application that they demoed with Lakefield.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote