Forget Intel Ivy Bridge, Haswell on the way

I think he's referring to "Sandy Bridge" as Sandy Bridge Architecture.

Haswell to be 10+ percent faster than Ivy Bridge

That's actually what some experts were estimating for Sandy Bridge over Nehalem/Westmere. So another Sandy Bridge like gain, well maybe slightly less are possible again.

Never on the 10GHz part, and I even have doubts on whether we'll see any clock increases at all in the future. 22nm is designed from the ground up to be optimized for lower power and performance/watt, and it'll intensify as time passes.

Catering for high end gamer type enthusiasts are the finickiest of the bunch because they don't really benefit from advancements that benefit every other category: Servers, Graphics, Mobile PCs, and Phones

 

also intel always makes the die skrinks smallest clock gain becuase there would be no reason to buy the following year if they made it a huge difference.


Let me better explain:

Going from SB to IB is 32nm to 22nm they leave IB at 77w TDP for desktop while SB was 97w TDP (if i recall). They do this so that they can increase Haswell TDP to 77w or whatever to make it worth while buying. (obviously there are achritecture changes that make it worth while but rare power not a huge gain.

So for laptops die shrinks are always the best buy because they are limited to a strick TDP limit. I doubt haswell will be much faster in laptop market with the same TDP because you can only due so much without having to either die shrink or add larger power envelope.

For desktops this strict limitation doesn't exist since there is better cooling. If you look into the past intel has done very similar things like this before. its how they sell stuff.


I know this is a horrible explanation but i am tired and its kinda hard for me to sum up this point into text. So i hope you can understand what i am saying

 

Looks like the first parts should be out in April 2013...

 

View attachment 88989

Yup, quads first!

 

Not true. High traffic data servers, streaming servers, and any kind of video production (encoding, decoding, etc) requires raw horsepower. Only reason gamers want a fast CPU is because many games don't make use of the multiple cores. I'd much rather have a 2GHz 8 core CPU with games that are properly multi-threaded than a dual core running 5GHz. But at the moment most games run 2 threads, newer ones taking more advantage of 4, but faster is better in this respect.

Ivy Bridge was that way too. And is it really MQ and XM instead of QM and MX?

Wonder if there will be a 35W quad again like with Ivy Bridge.

 

Any thoughts on how much gaming performance will improve with Haswell's HD5000 compared to the HD4000?

 

by the looks of it. It is called 4600 and depending on circumstances i believe they were saying up to 100% if i am not mistaken

 

Sounds exciting, perhaps we will get to a point where discrete graphics are no longer needed for 1080p gaming.

 

never unless you want low settings and play games that are 2 years old. oblivion can play on haswell at 1080p and at low/med graphics but that is a very old game even today. Also it is absurd that we still have these junk consoles out still. they wont replace them for a couple more years easy. The current ETA was 2015 for xbox 720? xbox 360 will be 10 years old at that point! Games graphics have been held back largely because of consoles. I wouldn't be surprised in a single year games graphics double when "next-gen" consoles come out.

 

Not gonna happen. For many reasons. By the time these come out the low end GPU's will be twice as powerful as today's, where Haswell IGP will likely only be 20-30% improvement over HD 4000 at best. Not to mention much faster dedicated RAM, wide bus width, and vast number of shader cells on dedicated cards. HD 4000 was supposed to be 100% improvement over HD 3000 but in reality it's only 25-30%

 

Can you elaborate a bit more on this information? Have Haswell gaming benchmarks been leaked? It seems you can run more recent games at 1366x768 (~1 million pixels / frame) with Ivy Bridge HD4000, according to Anandtech so if the Haswell integrated graphics is 100% faster, it would suggest that it can render the same games at 1920x1080 (~2 million pixels / frame), no? And then hopefully the Broadwell chip (HD6000?) will be even more powerful.

Perhaps so, but I've also read some articles suggesting the next gen consoles will be based on x86-64 PC architecture, resulting in multiplatform title development process that results in better optimized PC ports. Personally what's more exciting for me is not the gen graphics, but the fact that the consoles will have more than 256MB RAM and faster CPUs, enabling better interactivity, more dynamic open world game systems, etc.

We can already scale up the resolution for a current gen PC port, use DX11, high quality shadows, high res texture packs, etc., but there is no way to "scale up" better A.I., more interactive and complex game world, etc., as these are fundamental game design choices baked into the engine which are severely restricted by the limited memory and weak CPUs of current console hardware.

 

There are QM, MQ and XM chips coming.
QM and XM have the standard TDP we are used to: 35W/45W/55W while MQ have 37W/47W.

MQ have 2W higher TDP but the IGP is clocked to 400Mz instead of the 600Mz. I bet its because it have more EUs and need to downclock more when the power isn`t needed to preserve power

 

Wasn't that 100% improvement on desktop platforms (in which they achieved their goals, btw)? In the more thermally limited mobile sector even 30% is a good improvement.

 

n 2013 next generation retinna laptops i going to come out so 1080p isnt going to be the standard anymore

 

ummm it was "supposed to be 100% originally" because the information leaked said the CPUs would have 24 EU not 16 so that is why they were only a ~33% gain (16EU/12EU). Also it has been showed that 4000 has had a 25-50% gain depending on the game. NBC had a full blown review

ah thanks

it is called high res screen not retina....good lord when will people stop calling stuff by apple's stupid naming system

 

anyway you know what i meant There are ofcourse lots of ways to tweak the integrated graphics preformance. With RAM and RAM getting faster and faster a fair comparison between different gen HD xxxx chips is hard

 

YAY! I'm SO GLAD APPLE STARTED THIS TREND! I hate ALL current PC Laptops because they're downgraded to 1920 x 1080 or worse 1366 x 768, sometimes a 17.3 screen will only give 1600 x 900. Main reason why I stick to my nearly 7 year old Dell E1705's with 1920 x 1200 on a 17" screen. Plus my old Dells have a modem, so I can use AOL dialup at a hotel if you have to pay for wifi.

 

So somewhat stupid question. Does the CPU being 64-bit mean that the integrated GPUs only have a 64-bit interface with the system RAM?

 

not a clue...but isn't 64 bit stuff have to do with programs? Doesn't everything else use DMI or whatever

 

Short explanation: The difference between a 64bit and a 32bit processor is the width of the data bus. A 32bit CPU have a data bus that can represent numbers from 0 - 2^32 while a 64bit CPU can represent numbers 0 - 2^64, meaning it can calculate on a lot more numbers than the 32bit and is therefor faster.

 

thats doesn't help....i remember when 64bit processors came out there was no real difference

 

64bit allows more RAM to be used. The biggest difference to date.

 

In terms of actual performance of a program that is able to use x64 architecture... there were no noticeable performance differences.
Take 3d Studio Max for example.
Rendering a scene is basically identical between x86 and x64 in terms of actual speed (maybe 1% faster in x64) - except of course that in x64 version of the program... you could make more complex/higher res textures and scenes in general without fear of running out of RAM and crashing the program (which in turn would slow down the rendering process seeing how you are taxing the same cpu with more instructions).
Actual CPU performance was unaffected by the switch.

 

interesting i'll take your word for it since i got no clue

 

No need to take my word for it.
You can examine the info yourself.
I noticed no performance difference on a same CPU between x86 and x64 software.
Granted that higher RAM capacity has its own 'perks' (such as being able to run more programs at the same time, or a x64 version of a program under more complex settings without fear of running out of memory).

How much did x64 architecture contribute to new cpu's actual performance increase is another department.
I was merely comparing the differences between x86 and x64 software on a same CPU that is capable of both instruction sets.

 

Our Haswell chips might be delayed til early June. And processor names are mentioned in the slide from Intel.




Intel Haswell 4th Generation Core Series Delayed


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The CPUs are also detailed a little more. We will have Haswell CPUs with GT2 IGPs and other with GT3. GT3 is the fastest IGP. We will also have BGA (soldered on mainboard) and PGA (replacable) models. I`m pretty shure the 5th line is a typo and should say GT3

 

Haswell:

• Haswell-DT (Desktop)
• Haswell-H (Mobile)
• Haswell-MB (Mobile)
• Haswell-ULT (Ultra Low TDP)
• Haswell-ULX (Ultra Extremely Low TDP)

Broadwell:

• Broadwell-D (Desktop)
• Broadwell-H (Mobile)
• Broadwell-M (Mobile)
• Broadwell-U (Ultra Low TDP)
• Broadwell-Y (Ultra Low Power)

Link

 

why why keep changing naming scheme....so annoying

 

Look at Broadwell, is this finally when we see quad cores take over in laptops with duals only for ulv laptops and tablets?

 

i thought we were supposed to already have that from a discussion long ago in another one of these threads you made. I sure hope so. I would think 14nm would be enough

 

what is the difference between the H and the M mobile series?

 

prolly high performance for H (like the xm quadcore 55w processors now) and regular mobile for M (like the regular qm quad cores)

 

H is soldered and MB is socket

 

Yeah that pretty much sums it up.

I think the MB stands for MotherBoard. As in soldered to it

 

I wonder if this result in large difference between Sandy and Haswell in terms of heat and power consumption....

XBITLABS

 

Intel accelerates Haswell processor launch for next-gen ultrabooks

 

It's not a typo. Everything I have seen about Haswell to date has stated that GT3 will only be available on mobile BGA processors, not PGA ones.

 

My question is can you control the voltage per core yourself with TS if it was made to do it? Would this new change allow it to run single threaded programs more efficiently? My 3720qm is always using 25 or so watts to run a single thread game at 25%...????

 

No. I don't think any user control over voltage will be possible.

 

would it be possible to make it that way though or impossible? Curious ^^

 

ivy bridge cpu's at 7W TDP is great. I wonder what would be the GT version of Haswell 7W. If that can provide GT2 performance at 7W it would be great.

 

Does that 7W need active cooling in Tablets? What GPU performance against Nvidia Tegra 4, AMD Temash?

 

Haswell mobile CPU runs Dirt 3 on 1080p (No AA) just as good as the GT650M
AnandTech - Intel Haswell GT3e GPU Performance Compared to NVIDIA's GeForce GT 650M

 

or something like that I was pretty impressed still, I want to see the numbers, in terms of fluidity its very good.

 

Impressive, Intel can do such a things with a big box. Here is how AMD did similar show run a year ago and this year they utilized a Temash APU (up to 5W TDP) to run Dirt Showdown in 1080p.

That will need fan, especially the 7W is just lie! The Intel's 7W Y-Series is actually 13W TDP CPU.

 

on second thoughts it appears at 7W normal CPU speed is just 800mhz. I wonder if haswell can at least clock it around 1.4ghz. May be we need to wait until broadwell to see truly awesome fanless mainstream tablet/ultrabook.

 

Yeah would be nice to see some FPS on that Dirt3 game. Without one could just say its over 25FPS but now how much.
Not so impressive when AMD managed to do the same with a 5W APU lol. In Intel`s defence they ran it at 1080p with high settings " The settings were 1920X1080 at high with shadows at medium.". Don`t know what AMD did there though

 

yea but what did they do with AS and AA? I could see triliner and 0 AA lol. I don't find that very impressive.

 

This Dirt 3 game is almost two years old which ideal for Haswell APU benchmarks. Intel probably utilized a Haswell-H 2M-GT3 APU with 128MB side port Memory (maybe VRAM not sure how they call this cache memory). These APUs are either 47W or 57W TDP!
The reason why AS and AA was turned Off to keep calculation data below 128MB. Turning those features On would significantly increase the calculation data, which could not fit into the 128MB Cache. When that is happening, the APU have to use the system memory, but that is significantly slower as the 128MB cache. Of course for more complex games 128MB won't be enough in no way...

 

i wonder when DDR4 will come out and how that will affect it. Maybe broadwell?

also 128MB? must have missed that. That is a lot