Forget Intel Ivy Bridge, Haswell on the way

Will probably be delayed again, like always...

 

Hmm, strange. Same connector and form factor. So does a 1.35V part mean DDR3L or is DDR3L max 1.35v? I own these Samsung DDR3 1.35v 1600 RAM: Newegg.com - SAMSUNG 8GB (2 x 4GB) 204-Pin DDR3 SO-DIMM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Laptop Memory Model MV-3T4G3D/US

And it works fine in my DV6z (AMD) which is designed for DDR3. Unless the RAM is actually dual compatible and running at 1.5v.

 

Mystery solved - Haswell expected to up the graphics ante further again

 

One would think haswell is mature enough to have native 6-8 cores on die but is seems that a great deal of space is occupied by the integrated GPU

 

2-3x improvement over Ivy Bridge would be incredible. I mean, just wow at Intel's momentum in the GPU space. It'll be interesting to see how it compares in 2013 to the latest NVidia and AMD parts, and how the two GPU makers will respond to it.

 

Good point. Perhaps if they are forward thinking enough, offer two options, one with quad core and powerful GPU or 6-8 core with basic desktop 3D performance. Although for the consumer market, quad core is more than adequate for most users. I'd like to see AMD run with dual CPU's and crossfire the integrated GPU's, offering 8 CPU cores with a mid-grade discrete GPU performance using Crossfire. Maybe that will light a fire under Intel.

 

the competition would only happen if more expensive and usually better designed models used amd cpus, not to mention that the performance difference in terms of cpu is quite high, although AMD has the edge regarding igpus, and quite an edge might I add.

Im hoping for trinity ultrabooks to be a success, since that would be one good market for that, my fear is that the cpu performance would remind me of the mba 2008, while good looking it was damn slow, and with ivy, upping the cpu clocks to 2ghz and a performance increase of 15% per clock that would mean one powerful portable machine. And for ME the HD 3000 is already enough, I can play smoothly me3 with that, and some older games like WiC, although I do miss the higher settings that the 4670m provided me with.

 

I would say quad cores are the sweet spot for most people, especially if hyper-threaded. I honestly couldn't even imagine needing more CPU performance than Sandy Bridge. Maybe higher raw clock speeds for some frequency-dependent tasks, but not more cores. I can't wait until we get to a similar place with GPUs.

 

I'm waiting for Rockwell

 

Haswell 2013 chipset has 50 percent lower power consumption

Link So mainstream dual core Haswell can't get GT3 graphics, only quads and ulv's?


Supports 1.2V and LPDDR3 and ULV TDP is 15W down form 17W in Sandy Bridge.

 

Intel seems to like to make a lot of lofty claims these days.

 

will Haswell be backward compatible with motherboards/ram for Ivy Bridge?

meaning, if I buy a new IB laptop, will I be able to upgrade by just dropping a new chip in?

 

Nope, Haswell is a new architecture.

 

Judging by current trends... no. You couldn't upgrade an Arrandale/Clarksfield system to Sandy Bridge, and it seems you can't upgrade Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge.

 

because laptops get the shortend of the stick. desktops could go SB-IB

 

My Penryn seems so outdated compared to IB. Ahh. I think I will wait until the next TOCK for an upgrade.

 

Only with Z68. Other Sandy Bridge systems are a no-go... including H65, H67..

 

yea i was referring to the new MB that came out 6+months ago

 

So how would one go about upgrading from IB to Haswell? Just completely buy a whole new laptop?

 

Probably so, yes.

 

Haswell will be a whole new architecture, I doubt it will be compatible with Ivy Bridge boards, unlike to Sandy Bridge which was a die shrink and introduction of tri-gate transistors.

 

Exclusive: Intel's mobile Haswell chipset names revealed by VR-Zone.com

 

I am going to buy this, as you can see below my PC is more than outdated.

 

The waiting game has begun once again damn you Intel

 

Is this true? I've seen multiple posts on other forums saying IB was compatible with SB, who's misinformed?

 

everyone saying that you can upgrade SB to IB, the only chipset compatible is the desktop z68

 

I thought the P67 chipset was also compatible with IB, but I could be wrong. Here is the Tom's Hardware blurb talking about it.

 

Ivy Bridge was definitely an underwhelming update, that's for sure. Definitely not a good encore to the update that Sandy Bridge was.

 

Agreed. Trinity and Ivy Bridge was two huge "MEH" to me.
Haswell is the next architecture. Better CPU performance and a lot bigger IGP performance. Should be pretty interesting. Its a long wait though, but hopefully Intel have everything ready for next years CES

 

I definitely think Trinity is a great update... enough CPU performance with great GPU performance and more than 30% battery life increase is pretty impressive without shrinking the die size.

 

I wonder if they're going to get their drivers in gear with the Haswell IGP, however. I'm assuming the Haswell IGP is going to be enough for all but PC Gamers, but if it doesn't have the drivers to support the latest (and I'm not saying bleeding-edge) OpenGL, OpenCL, etc., then there's hardly a point.

 

Why is Trinity "meh" for you? It has a roughly 15 to 20% increase in IGP gaming performance vs. Llano, and improved cpu cores. If Trinity systems stay at a lower price point than Intel, I can't see how anybody could go wrong with Trinity.



via Anandtech's review.

 

Precisely because it was a 15%-20% increase in igp performance. It was hyped up to be a lot more than that.

Same with IVB and power savings/efficiency.

 

Their drivers already support the latest OpenGL and OpenCL (Sandy did not, but Ivy does).

Realistically, most people are only going to move to heterogeneous computing when Intel does it well (or when AMD can come up with a competitive CPU, but the former sounds a lot more probable than the latter). There are some people who are willing to buy a discreet GPU for specific applications, but this is a niche market because so few applications support it. AMD's integrated graphics are good, but they suffer from the same problem: few applications support heterogeneous computing right now and for the ones that don't, you are stuck with a pitiful CPU that's slower than a decent one from a year ago. Haswell should be the point at which OpenCL and such begin to go mainstream.

 

That is still exceptional performance for an IGP, and still superior to Intel (for the time being). Look at where integrated graphics were just a couple of years ago.

 

Any word on when Haswell will be coming out? Q3 of 2013?

 

Disappointment is what happens when something does not meet expectations. Trinity/IVB are improvements on previous generations, but not as big of an improvement as I (and I'm guessing Cloudfire) expected. Hence, disappointment.

 

For the time being, yes, but at the rate this is going, not for long. From your link Trinity is indeed ahead of Ivy... but only by 20% whereas Llano was ahead of Sandy by nearly a factor of two. Furthermore, the CPU likewise did not improve much -- it's still 1.5 to 2 times slower than Sandy Bridge, never mind Ivy. Trinity is better than Llano, but it is disappointing because it's not better by enough. It's certainly not encouraging Intel to compete: much of the die shrink to 22nm went simply to making a smaller chip (Ivy is 160mm2, Sandy was 216mm2 and Trinity is 246mm2).

Q2 of 2013 is more likely, although delays are always a possibility.

 

Why do you say that?

I'm a gamer and was going to wait for Haswell instead of doing my upgrade now to Ivy Bridge.

 

Are AMD's chipsets really benching 1.5-2 times slower than Intel?

 

In CPU functions, sometimes more than that. The GPU is where AMD is slightly ahead.

 

Well in the same market segment (A10 vs i5) AMD isn't that far behind. Trinity has a slower CPU but a faster GPU, so it pretty much evens out.

 

What does it mean for the Trinity CPU to be "25%" slower than IVB? (hypothetical question, not literal)

I have a 32nm Arrandale i5-480 in my laptop, and running NUMEROUS programs simultaneously (firefox w/ many tabs + video, office apps, music player, etc.) it doesn't really break much of a sweat. I don't gather that Trinity is unable to handle such a load in any capacity, so why all the knocking on CPU performance?

Yes, it's lower than IVB, but it's not meant to compete with high end IVB. Trinity is everyday computing and some gaming on low to mid range laptops while providing great battery life. It looks like it meets those requirements.

So why all the negativity? Put Trinity APU chips in all the laptops in Best Buy and nobody who uses those systems will be able to tell any difference, except in gaming performance.

 

Let me correct that for you

 

I have a strong feeling Haswell will be released sometime in the fall of next year. I mean, Sandy Bridge has not even proliferated on lower end laptops yet.

 

What is it that you expect of Haswell as a gamer that IB can't pull right now ? The key to more performance in games is more GPU power.

Mid end vs high end mobile CPU (i7-3610qm vs i7-3820qm) => no more than a ~20% difference in theoretical CPU power for a zero difference in games. Why do you need more ? Ivy Bridge already was a useless upgrade over Sandy Bridge in that regard.

Mid end vs high end mobile GPU => >1xx-2xx% difference. We are just about to reap the benefits of 28nm lithography (though there will certainly be more to it) which brings the kind of double digits improvements across the whole lineup that has become quite rare over the last few years. To contrast with the CPU side, here new hardware is about to bring a true uptick in performance (yay).

My point being, it seems to me that new GPUs are a more reasonable motive to delay a purchase of a gaming laptop. In that regard the release of 28nm goodness is at least as good as any, if not a great time to buy a new notebook, since it's highly likely we won't see the same kind of performance improvements before a while. Haswell will make no difference as far as games go on the other hand (but the future release of Radeon 8xxx / Geforce 7xx will).

 

I don't like the heat issues of the Ivy Bridge CPU's. It appears Intel buggered the TIM on the chips. Some are reporting as high as 90c on load and those are desktop CPU's.

 

The TIM issue is a desktop issue I believe. It's true it seems mobile IB does tend to reach slightly higher temps than SB but not enough that a gaming notebook couln't hold them in check. You obviously don't really need a new notebook

Regarding 90C on desktop CPUs I very much doubt this is with stock voltage and clock speed. The thing is Intel decided to go cheap because most people don't care whether their CPU is running at 60 or 75C on load and these temps are safe for the chip. They won't change their position on that matter for a couple angry overclockers.

 

I am waiting for the next generation after this, I am not buying a new notebook until I can no longer browse the web with my current one.

 

Got you covered.