Intel Says Chips To Become Slower But More Energy Efficient

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

You wish 10%!

A 10% IPC increase would be the largest since Sandy Bridge, perhaps even earlier. More likely is that Kaby Lake will feature faster integrated graphics to keep OEMs happy and promises of higher overclocking headroom which likely won't materialise and no IPC increase. Cannonlake will come in 2H2017, and likely feature faster integrated graphics, and the customary ~5% IPC increase we have come to expect.

So no, nothing interesting.

The problem is that Skylake for desktop was out from September 2015 onwards,and will be between 12 to 15 months before Intel refreshes it,so if Cannonlake were to be released 12 months after Kaby Lake I expect at least September 2017 - I think personally its more going to be early 2018 for desktop.

I expect the first 10NM products to be released in late 2017 will be Atom based and maybe some ULV Core i3 chips for laptops.

14NM for instance debuted in laptop and netbook chips the best part of a year before desktop chips IIRC.

 

[pingu666]

whats the new motherboards got?
usb 3 u can get add in cards for under 10 quid now for 4 ports
sata 2 to 3 isnt a huge upgrade even with ssd's

theres no m.2 so you are looking at pci-e card so you might hobble some gfx performance on some older platforms

what us older platform guys need is 8/16x pci-e card with usb 3.1 ports, 10gig ethernet maybe, 2-4 sata 6 controller/sata express, and a m.2 slot or too

that would extend a pc's life a long way, and be a cool add on for current pc's too

 

[keyser]

I came to the CPU forum to post this Nature article (its about the same subject).

The chips are down for Moore’s law
The semiconductor industry will soon abandon its pursuit of Moore's law. Now things could get a lot more interesting.

Anyway.. it turns out getting more performance from silicon is hard because of a heat problem that's been known about for 10 years. Hence why Intel has focused on power efficiency for 10 years. AMD also face the same heat/power problem since they also use silicon to make their CPUs.

I watched a MS Channel 9 video that mentioned this very problem facing Intel from 10 years ago. (skip to 41m 40secs)

When people say "we don't care about efficiency" I think you're missing the point. You can't put (say) 1000watts in an area that is 2cm square and hope to handle that heat with a normal heatsink, or any heatink, or liquid gas, or anything..

Exponential growth always ends; this is what it looks like.

 

[jigger]

Moore's law is about size reduction. This is about Intel is putting efficiency before performance to increase profit.

 

[keyser]

"Retooling" was the phrase used. Because the usual tricks to get more performance out of silicon doesn't work any more (heat problem).

The goal of any company is to increase profits..

 

[Orangey]

You're not cracking the case here, we've heard it all before.

Most of the journals (aside from some industry/EE ones) just go with what Intel tells them.

 

[mmj_uk]

This is about Intel is putting efficiency before performance to increase profit.

As CPU's have progressed they've gone from about 10W TDP to 130W TDP and in AMD's case upwards of 225W TDP, it's about time companies started to reverse that trend. The fact that Intel are doing it whilst still adding performance to both the CPU and particularly iGPU (an area that has long been criticised by AMD supporters) should be applauded.

Is it a crime for Intel to make a profit whilst researching and developing lower power usage? carrying on with the old paradigm of increased energy usage hasn't done AMD's profits any good as they've resorted to bundling expensive AIO coolers and losing sales to more efficient Intel/NVidia chips has it?

 

[jigger]

As CPU's have progressed they've gone from about 10W TDP to 130W TDP and in AMD's case upwards of 225W TDP, it's about time companies started to reverse that trend. The fact that Intel are doing it whilst still adding performance to both the CPU and particularly iGPU (an area that has long been criticised by AMD supporters) should be applauded.

Is it a crime for Intel to make a profit whilst researching and developing lower power usage? carrying on with the old paradigm of increased energy usage hasn't done AMD's profits any good as they've resorted to bundling expensive AIO coolers and losing sales to more efficient Intel/NVidia chips has it?

First up Intel are not just making a fortune, they're making a killing. Second Skylake is in the 40-80 watt range

Efficiency is good but Intel are taking performance backwards to spend money on developing even slower CPU's. You think this should be applauded?

Intel should focus on offering higher performance.

 

[Orangey]

more watts = more powar

 

[nick_000000]

more watts = more powar

First you get the money, then you get the power, then you get the woman

 

[Nasher]

Nope, first you get the car, then the woman

 

[nick_000000]

Nope, first you get the car, then the woman

That involves money

 

[mmj_uk]

First up Intel are not just making a fortune, they're making a killing. Second Skylake is in the 40-80 watt range

The CPU side is actually very efficient it's the fact that Intel are continually increasing iGPU capability that is keeping TDP at ~80W.

A 6 core Sandy Bridge-E was 130W TDP, 10 core Broadwell-E will be 140W TDP. AMD still haven't exceeded 4 core i5 levels with less than 125W TDP and that is even without an iGPU.

Efficiency is good but Intel are taking performance backwards to spend money on developing even slower CPU's. You think this should be applauded?

When did performance go backwards? there has been a consistent 5-10% increase every generation on the CPU side and the iGPU has come on leaps and bounds in the same time frame. Mobile devices now have better graphics and higher battery life.

All of AMD's APU's sacrifice performance to achieve higher power efficiency, where was the criticism there?

Intel should focus on offering higher performance.

They do it's called LGA2011 but those CPU's are overkill for most peoples needs, or is IPC suddenly important when it comes to criticising Intel?

 

[jigger]

Hey, if you're good with chips becoming slower to save 10-15 watts of power then great! but IMO what Intel are doing is moronic.

I have zero interest in spending £500 on upgrading a system thats slower than what I currently use. I don't care if Intel builds a chip that pulls power from the ether or one thats 300 watts, I really couldn't give a monkeys. I'll even upgrade my PSU if the performance is worthwhile.

 

[humbug]

I get the feeling Intel don't care what you or i think ^^^^

We need AMD to be the Enthusiast's champion again.

 

[DragonQ]

Hey, if you're good with chips becoming slower to save 10-15 watts of power then great! but IMO what Intel are doing is moronic.

I have zero interest in spending £500 on upgrading a system thats slower than what I currently use. I don't care if Intel builds a chip that pulls power from the ether or one thats 300 watts, I really couldn't give a monkeys. I'll even upgrade my PSU if the performance is worthwhile.

What do you think is going to happen? Intel will release a new desktop CPU line-up with 10% lower IPC for the same price and expect everyone to upgrade? No, that doesn't make any business sense.

This is primarily referring to the mobile market, although it's possible we'll see desktop parts with more cores but lower IPC and/or clock speeds since it'd be easier to dissipate heat when it's generated over a larger area. It'd be rather ironic though for Intel to pursue a strategy that largely failed for AMD over the past 5 years. Can't see it happening myself. What is more likely is that they'll push features such as hardware encoding, iGPU, and highly optimised instruction sets, rather than keep increasing IPC. We already know clock speeds aren't going to go up (aside from minor variations up and down between generations).

 

[Telecaster]

Perhaps more of a shift to a clearly defined middle-of-the-road desktop product line and an enthusiast grade product line. So maybe things like the unlocked i7s and i5s disappearing, fewer desktop choices, so just one i3, i5 and i7 which keeps it simple, and then save the big stuff for the mugs that will pay £500+ for a CPU.

 

[sam77]

I get the feeling Intel don't care what you or i think ^^^^

We need AMD to be the Enthusiast's champion again.

AMD is circling the grave atm

 

[jigger]

Perhaps more of a shift to a clearly defined middle-of-the-road desktop product line and an enthusiast grade product line. So maybe things like the unlocked i7s and i5s disappearing, fewer desktop choices, so just one i3, i5 and i7 which keeps it simple, and then save the big stuff for the mugs that will pay £500+ for a CPU.

From whats been said as the transistor size is reduced the chips have to get slower. For the performance to increase Intel would have split from making the the highend chips on the newer nodes at least untill they're at the point that performance can come before efficiency.

It would be great to see an enthusiast range of fire snorting 14-22nm beasts with a focus on clock speed. Intel could call this range the i7 Extreme and actually do justice to the name.