Skylake-U BGA and Skylake-S processors to be released end of Q2.

octiceps, only if it's broad and soldered somewhere. =\

 

An official statement from Intel. Although it is posted on my country's Facebook page, I don't think they could make a statement like that before taking permission from Intel's itself. This is why I'd like to know if Intel (main HQ maybe?) made a statement about it.


https://www.facebook.com/intelturkiye/posts/869610003102964?comment_id=869727903091174&reply_comment_id=869966729733958&total_comments=4&comment_tracking={"tn":"R9"}

My humble translation to English:

 

Well we already knew about this. No more socketed mobile CPUs. BGA only from here on out.

 

AMD mobile Zen APUs are going to use the same BGA socket that Carrizo uses (both are SoC so no feature problem there due to a lack of motherboard southbridge) so socketed mobile CPUs are dead. Also all consumer Zen CPUs and APUs launch in 2016!

 

Just a few corrections:

• DDR4 might not be coming to mobile Skylake (rumors)
• USB 3.1 might not be included on the Skylake chipset

KitGuru didn't read the source properly; DigiTimes just says that USB type-C is coming, not USB 3.1. A leak from a while ago showed only USB 3.0 support.

• Intel doesn't want to delay Skylake (source)

Intel wants to move quickly on Skylake because of demand from the company's customers, which are mainly device and PC makers.

"We didn't want to delay it, we talked to our customers, they didn't want to delay it. Everybody's just saying no, full speed ahead," Krzanich said.

 

Why do customers want Skylake so urgently if it doesn't support DDR4 or USB 3.1? I don't want Skylake if it doesn't have those things. No point.

 

According to that article, the quad-core mobile variants should still have DDR4.

Dual core mobiles are getting 64MB of L4 Cache for the Iris graphics. That's probably more meaningful than DDR4.

 

Is Type C only for 3.1 or also for 3.0?

 

Type C is the physical form factor. It can be used with any existing USB logical spec, including USB 3.0 and USB 2.0 or older.

 

Is this an honest question? I can't tell, haha.

That's like someone asking, "Why do customers want the 2015 Toyota Camry so urgently when it's still using multiport fuel injection...in the year 2015?"

 

That's another way of saying USB 3.1 is backward compatible with USB 3.0 is backward compatible with USB 2.0 is backward compatible with USB 1.1. In other words, it doesn't answer my question. I was wondering if only USB 3.1 will get the Type C connector since they are debuting at the same time.

 

Only vendors will know. There's no technical limitation to stop them from deploying Type-C form factor on 3.0-only systems.

Considering Intel's delay of native 3.1 support, they might just do it.

 

Type C is just a connector, but is indicative of USB 3.1, in the same way blue USB ports indicate USB 3.0 (albeit an odd way to indicate it). There will obviously be adapters to go from Type C to whatever USB connector you want/need on the other end. Of course technically there's nothing preventing someone from making a USB 2.0 port with a type C connector, although I don't think that will ever be the case. Type C is designed for USB 3.1 in mind.

 

Why is everyone excited about DDR4? Doesn't do much of anything but increase battery life. Increased latency, and then increased frequencies = balanced performance, which is not an improvement over DDR3(L).

Most likely mobile CPU's will be even more locked down and "green" like Broadwell. Alienware will be in dual-core heaven!

 

It doesn't increase latency. The latency number relative to the base loop is higher but frequency is higher too. Absolute latency is either lower or about the same.

 

Higher latency = lower performance.
Higher frequency = higher performance.
Both raised = negligible difference in performance.

DDR4 is efficiency. Doesn't do anything for FPS or gaming, not even in desktops. Helps in synthetic benchmarking. If I remember correctly, CL9/CL10/CL11 is DDR3L, and DDR4 is like CL15+.

 

In mobile platform, better thermals and battery life are the main points. Better integrated iGPU will also be another key factor. Smaller node, there several other reasons. No point staying on old tech from 2013 when it is 2015 moving forwards.

 

Um....it's already the case. While they'll likely go hand-in-hand, you can have either without the other.

The Nokia N1 uses type-C with USB 2.0; this LaCie external hard drive uses USB 3.0 with type-C.

Why did USB IF include this legacy support? Probably because no CPU chipsets will natively support USB 3.1 (specifically USB 3.1 Gen2) until 2016. There's already 3rd-party chipsets popping up, though.

I suspect USB 3.1 Gen1 might be natively supported in some CPU chipsets (that's what the MacBook and the Chromebook Pixel have)...but Gen2 (with 10Gbps) is probably farther off.