ah yes, I know it should be measured each by turn, but a generalization was done to make a point. And the point is this:
35W to 47W is like a 33% increase in TDP. Most systems can't just accommodate that significant of a change without updating the copper and fan. Most ultrabooks are borderline able to manage the 35W CPU's already. But curious to see the full lineup when finally released.
I know its a pretty hot and long distance, but the cooling of the rmbp 13 is nothing but impressive, in the apple side of life, the fans barely spins up and even more rarely at 100% cpu load, the cpu heat even with apple "let it be" fan control is awesome, so in the end with minor adjustments it can be done.
But in the end I think intel is putting their cards on where a lot of us points out, smaller form factors with good battery life and that is achieved with those ulv. Imagine a ULV powered x230, that thing would run for more than the 24h+ that it can (with all the batteries attached), I think 35h+ is quite possible, even 40h+
Now for numbers (I will use the launch numbers of every product, so nothing that was launched in this year counts):
Core i7:
Haswell - 8 total - 1 55w, 6 47w, 1 Xw (I think its 28w, its got the U prefix, so its either 28w or 17w)
Ivy - 9 total - 1 55w, 3 45w, 2 35w, 2 17w
Core i5:
Haswell - 5 total - Unknown TDPs, I really have to look at the article that said something about the new nomenclature, sigh
Ivy - 5 total - 2 17w, 3 35w
Core i3:
Haswell - 4 total
Ivy - 3 total - 1 17w, 2 35w
The numbers in terms of line up are incredibly close, I think this is their final line up, with ultrabooks so much in vogue and rising, with tablets looming, they have really focused on low power with something of a punch cpus and on the other side powerful quads. If this is it, I think we are done with 35w
This is a post that I did in the another forum, and pretty much I think the line up is stable and no 35w will appear
Now if we take that no 35w will appear, how does that leaves us with 28w?
it will be the same conundrum as in the rmbp 15, do we put the gt3e cores in the line up and lose cpu performance compared to the last product, while gaining igpu performance? The answer here for me is no.
A logic much like that works for me in the rmbp 13, do we lose the cpu performance compared to the last year model and gain igpu performance? Now if we put the gt3e cores, we not only gain 100% more performance at base line, but we do get more igpu performance to boot
Not to mention that with the possible emergence of the rmba, and with the barely significant difference in performance between the mba and the c/rmbp 13, to add the quad would make a very much interesting proposition
I do get the whole thing of, its a very expensive cpu, which it really is, no questions about it, on top of the high price of the quad we are still going to get the 50 from the edram, but it does make sense.
And with the cooling that the rmbp 13 has, just a minor adjustment should do it
PS: battery life between quads and dual cores standard voltage is pretty much the same now, if they use 28w, that would make a difference
I`m willing to bet that 33% higher TDP isn`t 33% higher temperatures. Its only worst case scenario
EDIT: Sigh: Its a mixed picture.
it turns out that maybe a tweak wont be necessary
