Forget Arrandale, SB Huron River Platform on the Way

So Nvidia is getting squeezed out of the mainstream market, and looking to diversify others? Interesting. Atom is the last Intel chip they can create chipsets for, and it's already been mentioned that Nvidia is getting out of the chipset business. It kind of makes me wonder where Nvidia's focus will be in the coming years.

 

I don't know how Intel can think their integrated GPU can kill mid-range GPU's. I just don't see it. I think Sandy Bridge in its own right is awesome. But to think it will have an effect on the mid-range GPU market is silly. I'm happy to see better performance in that area, but unless they double their die size and have onboard GDDR3 it's not gonna happen.

 

Considering the fact that Arrandale's graphics already rival low-end and integrated chips, and Sandy Bridge has been shown to have around twice the performance of Arrandale, I think it could definitely squeeze out the mid-range market. Intel seems to be focused on efficiency and gpu performance now.

 

Roger, hopefully nVidia will focus on GPU performance, while still being efficient and cool.

htwingnut, Intel didn't say anything - the analyst did. However, SB will have an effect on the mid-range gpu market; there will be a greater demand is my guess for something 'just a little more powerful than what's built-in to the (Intel) MB's'. Of course, that will only be near the introduction - some time after that (when Intel puts on the afterburners) who knows how fast they'll be able to surpass even very capable 'mid-range' gpu offerings. Or, even nibble on the heels of the 'high-end'?

 

Hehe, I take it that was tongue-in-cheek?

 

I still don't think it's even close to possible. GT 330m is mid-range, maybe even lower mid-range, and older tech. 3DMark Vantage for 330m is ~2500, for Intel integrated is ~250. That's a tenfold increase in performance. Heck even a GT 105m and ION 2 gets ~800 and that's definitely low end. I know Vantage isn't everything but when you're considering 3D performance it's a good measure.

 

Hmm, that could be. I'm only familiar with 3dmark06 though. For me personally though I've never really trusted synthetic benchmarks as it rarely in my opinion translates to real-world performance. I can tell you though that my T410 with Core i5 has very decent graphics performance (for my needs anyway ). It's a huge step up from the older GMA graphics chips atleast.

 

It's hard to tell, because I think the only Sandy Bridge IGP benchmarks we have right now are all desktop parts, and there it's about equal to a Desktop ATI Radeon HD5450 ( Anandtech source). We don't know how good (or bad) the mobile IGPs are yet, I don't think.

 

The mobile IGPs have lower base clocks, but higher turbo IIRC. So, they might even perform better.

Either way, Ivy Bridge and AMD Fusion will undoubtedly end the lower-midrange discrete market and really threaten the upper-midrange. It simply won't have a purpose anymore. By the time Haswell is released, we're really going to be in a totally different market.

 

Part of what makes a GPU faster than integrated is dedicated RAM. You're going to be restricted by using the system DDR3 which is significantly slower than GDDR3 or GDDR5. DDR3 max bandwidth is 6.4GB/s. GDDR3 is 60+ GB/s.

Not to mention other factors like bus width, and shader count.

The Anandtech article only shows low detail. But in the one instance where they turn the detail up, the lower end dedicated cards will manage with minimal hit to performance, but will start to degrad integrated significantly. Unfortunately they only had one game to compare, but I guarantee you that will be the case.

 

Because many people formerly used mid-range GPUs for media playback acceleration, not gaming.

When Intel moved the GPU onto the CPU package with Arrendale (Core i3/i5/i7 mobile CPUs), laptop manufacturers were no longer presented with the question of Intel GPU *OR* nVidia/ATI GPU. Now, they must decide if they want Intel GPU *AND* nVidia/ATI GPU.

If the Intel GPU is "good enough" to accelrate up to 1080p video playback, then they effectively took away the demand for media playback acceleration from nVidia/ATI. It's a very smart move.

 

Not quite. The bandwidth of single channel DDR3-1600 (which is what Sandy Bridge is rated for) is 12.8GB/s, but remember, practically all laptops are now dual-channel so you get 25.6GB/s. This is comparable to current mid-range cards such as the GT435M, although of course the dedicated card does not have to share with the CPU. Furthermore, in the future, both AMD and Intel will be increasing the number of channels (Intel has already done it for the high end a couple of years ago and both do it for servers).

Again, what is coming out right now is basically replacing the low end GPUs. It will be possible to run games on it, but it's not designed for high end gaming. The gaming CPU+GPU combos will come, but not for another couple of years.

 

I agree with that. But I was referring to 3D for the gaming experience which is primarily the reason for a dedicated 3D card.

 

Except for the low-end and lower-midrange cards, which are useless for gaming. Those are the ones that are going to be pushed out of the market very soon. In addition, casual gamers are going to feel less compelled to buy midrange cards when IGPs offer almost equivalent performance (as Haswell should offer, and as AMD will offer by the end of next year). Midrange sales will drop significantly.

 

Exactly.

Why bother getting a laptop with a weak GPU like the nVidia 310M, when I can just get a laptop with an Intel GPU instead? The laptop with the Intel GPU will be cheaper, lighter (due to smaller mobo PCB size and lower cooling requirements), and have better battery life.

 

The question is will Intel have drivers that are good enough for light gaming? Once they start competing in the lower to lower mid range they better step up or they will risk crash and burn. (Pun intended for crash, certainly not for burn )

 

Because ANY modern discreet graphics is better than integrated graphics. I can assure you a GT310 will stomp on Intel HD graphics for almost anything except for heat/energy usage.

Most games won't even start with integrated graphics, games will error out.

 

You're talking about gaming. I am specifically NOT talking about gaming. In my post, I specifically stuck to only video acceleration. Not everybody who buys a laptop wants to play 3D games on it.

If an Intel GPU can accelerate 1080p video, generate lower heat, use less energy, and do it cheaper, then it is most definitely superior for people who don't care about 3D gaming.

 

I really get tired of people saying that low-end or integrated graphics are useless for gaming. They are not. I can play ALL of my old games just fine, most of them on highest settings, with Arrandale graphics. As for modern games, many if not most are playable on atleast the lowest settings. Sandy Bridge will offer as much as twice the graphics performance currently available with Arrandale, so that gap will close even more.
We are no longer in the days of GMA 950/3100/4500 graphics. Things have improved significantly and will continue to do so.
[/end rant]

 

if they continue to go X2 thing might go that way and people might start to sy haey look my new intel hd 5900

 

That's very possible, and in fact seems to be the way Intel is going. Also look at AMD's Zacate processor, which should boost GPU performance quite a bit for the low-end notebook market.

 

What are your old games?

I've recently rediscovered my old Duke Nukem 3D and Raven Software stuff from Windows 95. DN3D doesn't like to play in OpenGL though so it looks crappy but it's worth it to have Duke back!

 

I have more than 80 PC games, I don't want to list them all. I will say though that games like Battlefield 1942, Vietnam, all play on high resolution and max settings, and plays great. Battlefield 2 and 2142 I can play on high resolution with medium settings and they also play great. 2142 also plays totally smooth with 32 bots on a map, but gets choppy at 64.
Medieval 2: Total War also plays wonderfully at high resolution/medium settings.
Older Quake 3 based games I can totally max out everything and they're totally smooth. That's just to name a few.

 

Intel appears to be launching the low power versions of Sandy Bridge earlier than expected:

Looks like they got a lot of SB chips if they can bin them into low power ones so early. I wonder if these will be priced to compete with AMD's Bobcat machines or if Intel will try to go for higher performance, higher price ultraportables.

 

Core i5:
2.5GHz 2520M
2530UM
2.6GHz 2540M

Core i7:
2610LM
2620LM
2.6GHz 2620M
2630UM
2640LM
2.2GHz 2720QM
2.3GHz 2820QM
2.4GHz 2920XM

Still this has me excited to see what ulv quad cores Ivy bridge brings...

 

Intel: Sandy Bridge Processor Is the Pentium of Our Days.

 

When I see it, I'll believe it...

 

Intel's PR at work. Still, with no native USB 3.0 support my feelings on this "upgrade" are 'meh'. Coming from an Arrandale based system it might not be a huge upgrade, save for the integrated graphics performance.

 

USB 3.0 support is gone? Is it possible SB will have light peak support, and through that OEMs will be able to add USB 3.0 ports without a controller chip?

 

No. Lightpeak is not mature yet. And USB 3.0 support is not "gone", it was never really there, and just requires a separate controller chip, just like now.

 

Which unfortunately means that most systems wont come with USB 3.0 support, because manufacturers have to pay extra for the NEC chip, when normally they get it "free" with Intel chipsets. *sigh*

 

Well, I guess it depends on how hard USB 3.0 is going to be pushed. USB 3.0 isn't hard to find on a lot of the systems I look at, although I grant that most of what I look at is higher end (gaming/workstation).

 

Seems like SB for desktops will be available before CES next year. According to Sweclockers.com (swedish website) several stores have updated their inventory and put a release date on december 17th. People have emailed them and they have confirmed the date

Not notebook CPUs but interesting none the less

 

Typically desktop parts available earlier than notebooks...

 

I doubt that. They're not going to wait for Intel if it's an avid selling point, which it is. You might not get it on base model notebooks and netbooks, but otherwise, any kind of powerful notebook they can price it in.

 

Prices of desktop Sandy Bridge hint : SemiAccurate :: Sandy Bridge pricing leaks in Sweden

The author screwed up his maths but you get the idea, they won't be cheap and if the price is accurate I see no incentive for Lynnfield/Bloomfield owners to upgrade. I hope that's not premonitory of similarly high premiums on SB notebooks.

 

The conversion to dollars is highly dubious. Electronics in Europe are almost always more expensive than their counterparts in the US -- I don't know about the SEK, but you can usually just take off the Euro sign, put a $ in its place and get a more accurate conversion than if you accounted for the currency differences.

That said, I would not expect them to be cheaper than Lynnfield/Arrandale. Barring some competition from AMD (non-existent at the moment), Intel tends to keep prices constant from generation to generation (performance per $ and per watt increases, of course).

 

Ivy Bridge 22nm may launch in early 2012

 

If they're missing the holiday season deliberately, they're really shooting themselves in the foot. It's one thing to release a product in the summer (as Apple does) and quite another to do it right after the holidays. I suspect they might change their tune if AMD comes out with anything worthwhile.

 

Intel needs to go back to the summer releasing of new cpu's. Waiting until January is too long.

 

well, then laptop manufacturers have the holiday season to clear their current stock

 

Ivy Bridge in Q1 2012 is fine, it secures a decent lifespan for Sandy Bridge. Wonder if it's going to be mainstream first again, since I heard the high-end Sandy Bridge CPUs won't be out before H2 2011.

 

To continue with Sandy Bridge's pricing. How does the i5-2500K sound for the price ? The only disappointment is that HT is reserved to the i7-2600(K).

 

Very interesting. If you look at their current price list, it appears that at the same price and the same TDP, you now get a CPU clocked 500MHz higher (compare Core i5-760 to Core i5-2500). And for the unlocked Core i7 (currently 875K), the price actually went down (from $342 to $317 for the 2600K) despite the clock speed increasing by 466MHz.

Just from the clock speeds alone, the performance increase is nearly 20%. If they can manage another 15-20% clock for clock, the performance per dollar will skyrocket. I hope the laptop parts get the similar pricing.

Another thought: they are really eating up Bloomfield's territory. Out of the all the LGA1366 CPUs, only the hexacore ones are not outright inferior (unless you have some bizarre application that greatly benefits from QPI) and even though they start at $885, they will still lose to the $317 2600K in scenarios which have fewer than 5 threads (or possibly even fewer than 6).

 

i noticed ces is around jan 6-9. When does laptop manufacturers like dell release new products?

 

Depends on which models I guess, most likely over the course of January (even possibly right after CES) for some, february for others.

 

Core i7-2630QM is a new quad core.

 

Where did you get the information? Any links? Hopefully the 2720qm won't be priced much higher than 2630qm.

 

It seems the i7-2630qm (quad core 2,0ghz) has appeared in a leak about the MSi gaming notebook replacing for the GX660 but has been removed almost immediately after. So either a new CPU that wasn't featured in the leaked lineup up to now, or an incorrect reference.

 

do a google search of 2630qm and results for future Systems show up,
lenovo Y560P, Acer N73SV...

Some you can even "buy" but not in stock