Intel Looking to Cut Power Consumption on Future Ivy Bridge Chips

[Glideslope]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

The point was that Intel has experience in fabbing for ARM designs, having made ARM cpus back in the days.

Got it. Thanks Man.

[iSayuSay]

Originally Posted by Acorn

Ipad 7 now with intel HD graphics. ::::-puke-::::

You don't know what Intel could come up with its next iteration IGP. It could be very decent at least on Broadwell. Sure SNB and IB iGP is terrible for more serious usage. But even then it makes low end mainstream dGPU obsolete already.

[Cod3rror]

I wonder what this means for laptops. Are we going to have fanless laptops soon?

I'd love that! Fan is the pretty much the last moving/mechanical part in a laptop. If laptops can dump fans, they can get even thinner, completely quiet and with no moving parts, that would be really cool.

[iKnowMr.Jobs]

Originally Posted by bb426

Why the hell would an iPad EVER run x86?

Steve Jobs would laugh at the idea.

Funny you say that. He almost stuck an intel chip inside the first iPad. It was Tony Fadell that forced his hand to go with ARM.

[thekev]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

Intel could just dust off the ARM fab it once had :

Image

That graphic is extremely funny.

[Chupa Chupa]

Originally Posted by deconstruct60

Actually no. The RT devices are meant to compete against the more classic Windows usages. There are and will be no RT phones or 5" devices. 7" devices are pretty unlikely also. Those will be covered by Windows Phone which is an OS competitor to iOS.

RT should sweep up the remnants of the netbook devices with a much better form factor and cost basis. Initially they are priced too high to do the 2nd and 3rd iterations will likely do it for the most part. The sub $300-350 market is likely largely lost to "phones and smaller" devices.

So instead of dumping that netbook for an iPad you dump it for Windows RT. The Surface + keyboard is far closer to being a netbook than an iPad once the pricing gets lowered.






Large and mid companies don't move to anything. The organizational inertia typically makes them slow, risk adverse adopters of almost everything (except high bonus checks for executives) . So the specifics of RT and Windows 8 are immaterial.

Right, but remember when the iPad came out and all the PC-types were saying a netbook is a better value? Turns out it wasn't because Netbooks were uncomfortable to use (I had a Lenovo S10), slow, and couldn't really do a whole lot. The RT is very similar. You may think it doesn't compete with the iPad or Android tablets but it is. There aren't too many netbook owners around. Again RT is selling poorly out of the gate.

My point exactly regarding large companies. The inertia is tremendous to get them to change. They'll be with Windows 7 for a very long time. So where does that leave Window 8 tablet adoptions. Not consumers. Not businesses. Who's left?

[malak]

Originally Posted by deconstruct60

Intel being purely just a foundry for someone isn't likely going to happen. That would be an indicator of Intel selling away the crown jewels. Intel is not a "job shop" and there is no way they are going to make margins like they currently do being one.
...
It is likely not in exchange but a courtship dance both sides are doing. We "could do" ARM stuff, but in the end it is really about exploring ways to keep the x86 contracts alive and growing.

ARM competition in mobile space and servers AND a PC market in decline mean Intel could have REAL problems to make their new process and fabs profitable. Their margins will suffer anyway.

For Intel, even a deal with Apple to produce an Ax chip for the iPad could secure sales and maximize fabs production.
An x86 iPad would be even better to get an instant big part of the tablet market for their x86 chips, they want it badly, even with low margins Atoms.

Apple could then get the process advantage in the mid-term, while securing their chip supply.

And please, stop this RISC vs CISC nonsense, and ARM emulation is doing quite well on Android x86 phones, so it shouldn't be a problem to get most existing iOS apps running.

[GregAndonian]

Originally Posted by iMacFarlane

Bootcamp option? Windows 8 on the iPad?

You show me an iPad with the ability to run iOS apps and Windows 8 apps, and I'll show you the end of every other tablet currently in production.

iPad: "Let's try this again... You can buy an iPad, and still use all your Windows apps."

Surface Pro: "Touche!"

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by Chupa Chupa

So where does that leave Window 8 tablet adoptions. Not consumers. Not businesses. Who's left?

Nowhere. Everyone's waiting for Windows 9 because we've all got it drilled into our collective unconscious that we should only try every other Windows release.

[Macist]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

These ARM discussions are always great at showing who knows what they're talking about and who doesn't.

Do you honestly think Intel couldn't whip up a processor as low powered and cool as an ARM processor? It's like saying Bugatti couldn't build a scooter, because they're only good at making big engines for cars.

The only reason they've never done it before is because they've never had to. ARM is a decent processor, great for what they're used for, and I applaud the fact they're finally kicking Intel around enough in the mobile sector that they've finally decided to start focusing on efficiency rather than yet more speed enhancements.

...but ARM chips aren't that much better. As has been pointed out here by people who know even more than me, an ARM chip running as quick as an Intel chip would consume just as much power. There's no real advantage between the two. Once ARM finds a way to eek as much power out of their chips with as low a power usage and heat dissipation as possible, and Intel works in reverse, finding ways to make their fast chips more energy efficient, there will be no real reason to prefer one over the other on a pure spec basis.

It's around that's when things will start getting really interesting.

Nvidia have predicted ARM super computers are the future of performance computer, with Intel only a player because it's the CPU of Windows.

http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-n...ore-efficient-

Nvidia, though, don't know what they're talking about.

Apple are rumoured to be looking to bring ARM to laptops and desktops down the line. Dell is already testing powerful ARM-based servers. Get with the program, dude. Intel's fast going the way of Microsoft - its mobile offerings are really nowhere. ARM began its life on desktop computers - the Acorn Archimedes, which, in its day, was miles ahead of the 8086 and 286s in mainstream PCs.

And Bugatti make a better scooter than Piaggio? I don't think so.

3 years - Intel will be frequently referred to as being 'in trouble' and ARM will be in everything from our Macs to workstations and servers. Watch this space.

[Renzatic]

Bugatti makes scooters? Really?

Your argument only works if you assume Intel is absolutely stuck where they're at, and will allow ARM to eat their lunch over the next three years. Admittedly, the mobile revolution caught all the old big players with their pants down, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're all out of the game.

If anything, I believe Intel is more likely to weather this storm they've found themselves in than even MS. ARM chips can run better at lower wattage, but still can't match Intel for pure performance on the high end. You have to ask yourself which is more likely to happen. ARM matching Intel on processing power in the near future, or Intel making their chips as power efficient as ARM. If you ask me, it's not an either/or situation, as we'll see both eventually meeting in the middle somewhere.

...though ARM and Nvidia together is a pretty potent combination.

[Val-kyrie]

Originally Posted by TC03

I don't think Apple is dissatisfied with ARM. The A6 is very solid and gives Apple a competitive edge.

I agree with you insofar as the discussion is confined to tablets/phones and apps designed solely for these products. However, if Apple were to try to consolidate OS X and iOS and offer that across its entire hardware platform a la Win 8, then ARM chips seem to lack enough power to run certain apps. Hence, some apps only run on OS X and not iOS. (Yes, there is also a difference in programming language and architecture, but the point here is processing power.)

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by bb426

Why the hell would an iPad EVER run x86?

Steve Jobs would laugh at the idea.

Dead people don't dictate terms to the living.

[pearvsapple]

Anyone with a brain knows Intel will eventually end up in an iPad. That's when AAA softwares will become available for it as well. High end AAA games, full-fledge Photoshop, music editing, OSX and its advanced functions, etc. ARM is just the next victim and new buyers are just scared their new purchases will become a legacy item.

[deconstruct60]

Originally Posted by Chupa Chupa

. You may think it doesn't compete with the iPad or Android tablets but it is. There aren't too many netbook owners around. Again RT is selling poorly out of the gate.

RT is selling no more poorly than the iPhone did. Gaged against the classic PC market size, yeah it is much smaller. But it is on track to do multi-million units.

It isn't that they don't interact competitively with the iPad and Android tablets. But it is more so stopping the bleed to those devices than trying to displace them.

But as Tablets get commoditized the iPad is going to be just as much an outlier to the market as the high end iMac and Mac Pro is to the general PC market.

[Eidorian]

Originally Posted by Giuly

Actually, current Ivy Bridge chips don't come below 17W, with clocks ranging from 1.7 to 2.0GHz, so that should be the magic frontier of them.

Configurable TDP allows you to drop an Ivy Bridge ULV processor to 14W or even higher past 17W if proper cooling is provided.

[deconstruct60]

Originally Posted by Macist

Nvidia have predicted ARM super computers are the future of performance computer, with Intel only a player because it's the CPU of Windows.

http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-n...ore-efficient-

Nvidia, though, don't know what they're talking about.

Errr. yes. Nvidia doesn't know what they are talking about.

Recent November 2012 Top500 list

http://top500.org/list/2012/11/

Not a ARM powered solution in site in the top 50. Or further down.....

http://top500.org/statistics/list/

Select
Top 500 release : November 2012
Category: Processor Generation

or
Category: Accelerator Co-Processor.


Nvidia is present, but ARM technology is not.

3 years - Intel will be frequently referred to as being 'in trouble' and ARM will be in everything from our Macs to workstations and servers. Watch this space.

ARM will be in relatively inexpensive stuff, but that would leave it out of Mac and the vast majority of servers. There are some corner cases where ARM servers are going to go. High end computation and performance is not one of those.

[eas]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

These ARM discussions are always great at showing who knows what they're talking about and who doesn't.

Do you honestly think Intel couldn't whip up a processor as low powered and cool as an ARM processor? It's like saying Bugatti couldn't build a scooter, because they're only good at making big engines for cars.

The only reason they've never done it before is because they've never had to. ARM is a decent processor, great for what they're used for, and I applaud the fact they're finally kicking Intel around enough in the mobile sector that they've finally decided to start focusing on efficiency rather than yet more speed enhancements.

...but ARM chips aren't that much better. As has been pointed out here by people who know even more than me, an ARM chip running as quick as an Intel chip would consume just as much power. There's no real advantage between the two. Once ARM finds a way to eek as much power out of their chips with as low a power usage and heat dissipation as possible, and Intel works in reverse, finding ways to make their fast chips more energy efficient, there will be no real reason to prefer one over the other on a pure spec basis.

It's around that's when things will start getting really interesting.

Yes, I agree, these ARM discussions do have a way of showing who knows what they are talking about, and who doesn't.

Perhaps you can explain to me how it is that Intel has never been successful at launching a new general CPU instruction set architecture, besides x86. It isn't for want of trying, but despite all their efforts, they've failed.

Perhaps you can fill us in on how it is that the 64-bit instruction set executed by Intel chips today isn't exactly their creation either, it is AMDs, who took it upon themselves to create a 64-bit version of the x86 instruction set while Intel was trying to make a go of Titanium. In the process, they added a bunch of general purpose registers, something that x86 assembly programmers and compiler writers had been hoping for for a couple decades.

Also, if Intel can produce a competitive, low-power x86 CPU, if only they were to try, please explain what Medfield represents, if not a try to make a low-power x86 CPU? And then you can explain why it has so few meaningful design wins.

Intel isn't dead, but its viability in the mobile market, and its dominant position in desktops, laptops and servers is by no means a certainty.

[PrayForDeath]

Originally Posted by sparkso

what's the point? the main power wasting part is the display, the processor takes up like just 10% of the whole device's power usage anyway.

The ARM processor does yea, not the Intel one.

[G51989]

Originally Posted by Macist

Nvidia have predicted ARM super computers are the future of performance computer, with Intel only a player because it's the CPU of Windows.
.

Thats awesome they can make a big super computer.

But when it comes to high performance desktop and laptop chips, nothing in the ARM lineup can touch the Intel Core Processors, and for Enterprise, nothing can beat the Itaniums and Xeons.

And Bugatti make a better scooter than Piaggio? I don't think so.

Owning a scooter is like owning a 99 dollar Android Tablet, you have to have no self respect to own one.

3 years - Intel will be frequently referred to as being 'in trouble' and ARM will be in everything from our Macs to workstations and servers. Watch this space.

You assume that Intel is gonna sit on its ass and do nothing, they won't. Haswell looks to be a very strong ARM competitor. The next generation ATOM is looking very competitive as well.

Intel is VERY skilled company, they are very innovative on a hardware level, don't expect them to sit around and get their ass kicked, they will fight back.

3 years - Intel will be frequently referred to as being 'in trouble' and ARM will be in everything from our Macs to workstations and servers. Watch this space.

No they won't, they make some of the best chips in the world, you seriously think they will sit on their ass and do nothing?

Who would want an ARM processor in a desktop anyway? Even an A15 can't come close to i Chip performance.

----------

Originally Posted by PrayForDeath

The ARM processor does yea, not the Intel one.

Even with an Intel Processor, it still takes up a tiny amount of power.

The majority of power in a mobile device is used up by the screen.

----------

Originally Posted by Giuly

Actually, current Ivy Bridge chips don't come below 17W, with clocks ranging from 1.7 to 2.0GHz, so that should be the magic frontier of them. I don't remeber the IPC on those things, but clocking a CISC chip lower than a RISC chip while maintaining the same performance should be hard to do. It didn't work when they competed with the PowerPC architecture, and I doubt that it would work now. The problem with CISC designs is that they're just not as efficient compared to RISC, all things equal.

x86 chips have been using RISC cores for about a decade now, so thats an invalid argument.

[G51989]

Originally Posted by eas

Perhaps you can explain to me how it is that Intel has never been successful at launching a new general CPU instruction set architecture, besides x86. It isn't for want of trying, but despite all their efforts, they've failed..

Other than Itanium, which is for Enterprise only, ( the chips cost more than the average home desktop computer ), when have they tried to launch an entirely new architecture? Oh yeah.

Never.

Also, if Intel can produce a competitive, low-power x86 CPU, if only they were to try, please explain what Medfield represents, if not a try to make a low-power x86 CPU? And then you can explain why it has so few meaningful design wins.

Haswell is going to be giving us that, Medfield was a rushed chip from what I understand, and it manages to compete with ARM on a couple levels, not bad for something they just threw together.

Intel isn't dead, but its viability in the mobile market, and its dominant position in desktops, laptops and servers is by no means a certainty.

Intel won't be dead, they're a great company with a huge skill set. You really think they're going to sit around and let ARM kick them out of the market?

Right now, Intel is still the best chips you can get for a desktop or laptop.

The A15 isn't bad.

But the iPad 4 is one of the most Powerful ARM devices out there, and it can hardly compete with a mid grade Pentium 4 from 2003.

So, except for the highest end ARM processor in the consumer world, they can't compete?

So, looks like the ARM guys have a decade of performance to catch up on....


And why do people think that X86 is more inefficient than ARM? They are instruction sets, not chip design....Jesus Christ.

[coolspot18]

Originally Posted by bb426

Why the hell would an iPad EVER run x86?

Steve Jobs would laugh at the idea.

Why would he laugh? Next was built on x86. OS X was ported to x86. If x86 can do the job, I don't see why not.


Anyways, Steve Jobs is dead, he's not dictating anything, nor is he rolling around. Seriously people, too much worship for a dead visionary egomaniac.

[Chupa Chupa]

Originally Posted by deconstruct60

RT is selling no more poorly than the iPhone did. Gaged against the classic PC market size, yeah it is much smaller. But it is on track to do multi-million units.

It isn't that they don't interact competitively with the iPad and Android tablets. But it is more so stopping the bleed to those devices than trying to displace them.

But as Tablets get commoditized the iPad is going to be just as much an outlier to the market as the high end iMac and Mac Pro is to the general PC market.

The company that reports sales would suggest otherwise: LINK


The iPad hasn't shown any signs of being commoditized so not sure what you are talking about. Sales of iPads continues to grow while prices have remained the same. Doesn't sound like a race to the bottom to me. In fact, the iPad mini is $125 more than the Nexus 7 but is the #3 most wanted holiday gift. The 10" iPad is #1.

[Eidorian]

I did a few minutes of digging and found this from IDF 2012.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6248/h...is-the-new-17w

Originally Posted by Anandtech

Early next year we'll see limited availability of 10W Ivy Bridge ULV parts. These parts will be deployed in some very specific products, likely in the convertible Ultrabook space, and they won't be widely available. Any customer looking to get a jump start on Haswell might work with Intel to adopt one of these.

Update:

Look that I just found!

http://www.madboxpc.com/intel-lanzar...0w-en-el-2013/

http://chinese.vr-zone.com/43014/int...ater-12042012/

Intel Mobile Y Series Processors at 10W.

[Asia8]

Originally Posted by imageWIS

Dead people don't dictate terms to the living.

That's not what those Sunday morning door to door home invaders keep telling me on Sunday mornings when I'd rather be sleeping.