Upcoming Quadcore "8th" Gen Mobile CPU's

I'm eagerly awaiting these new quadcore cpu's with supposedly 4 real cores much like the 35w and 45w ones available now. Would be really nice to have 8 threads to play with In a 15w package.

http://laptopmedia.com/news/intel-core-i5-8250u-is-coming-acer-swift-3-to-get-it-early/
https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-core-i7-8550u-spotted-in-acer-nitro-notebook

Be interesting to see what the break down is for turbo modes on all 4 cores. Unscientific testing on my Dell M4700 with an I7 3840QM showing it can load all 4 cores @ 2.8ghz using approx 28w of power (similar to the 28W thermal limit on some mobile cpu's turbo)

It can Turbo all 4 cores at 1.6ghz using 15W. Obviously this cpu is "4" generations behind the upcoming cpu's
My guess is that we will see 2.4-2.6ghz using 4 cores on the mobile chips. I'm sure I'm wrong but i'll be holding out for a laptop based on these CPU's

 

@Silvr6 I too consider skipping Kaby Lake for the upcoming 8th Gen quad-core ULV... although high price & late availability may still push me towards 7th gen.

 

imagine quadcore surface pro. jeez

 

I didn't consider skipping to Coffee Lake because my older laptop, the Haswell Lenovo Flex 2, just can't make the run anymore. I can't bother accessing the inside. (Spec: i5-4210U + GT 840M)
I've got a new Acer Kaby Lake ultrabook. Since I find "good" GT940MX laptops out of my budget, I will have to trade it for better features such as good battery life and screen. (Acer: i5-7200U)
Since MX150 was not available when I bought it, I find it rather disappointing.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

 

If you know how long did microsoft take to pull their head out of the ground and realize that Kabylake is here, you'd have to wait quite a long time for it.




Now only if we can get an X1 Carbon Gen6...

 

Or Thinkpad Yoga 370 successor - with matte non-PWM screen, a quad, and without any sacrifices!

 

Turbo will be limited to short periods of load.. why ? Because Intel already confirmed that the CPU needs to be configured at 28W TDP to sustain high turbo clocks, but most OEM's will use 15W as usual. Otherwise they would have to adjust the cooling solution of their devices.

 

@Papusan See more tricks set up by Intel to give a quad core rip-off.

 

@Vasudev - CMIIW but most T-series thinkpads use C-TDP up right?

 

Almost same scam as Ngreedia's Max-Q
What did you expect? Better with thin and flimsy. Proper cooling cost money!! Pure powa will come second or last. Design before functionality. Vote with your wallet!!

 

Regarding the 28W thermal limit, I did mention that in my original post, if my "old" 3rd gen quad core can hit 2.8ghz on 4 cores at a 28w limit then I would imagine that an 8th (really 7.5 gen) would be able to do better.

This won't be like the first 45w quad cores that could only turbo 100mhz or so above their default clock speed (Think i7 720qm 1.6ghz turbo to 1.73ghz)

I know people like to ***** about intel but I think you will be pleasantly surprised at the performance of these new chips. My guess is we will see a very high single and dual core turbo and a quadcore turbo in the mid 2ghz.

We will find out tomorrow

 

Yes most lenovo's employ cTDP up method through windows or through BIOS. Throttling mechanism are too strict and most set <80C.
On my sis's lappie from Lenovo they downclocked the core clocks and mem clocks of amd radeon gpu which is a basic GPU could play anything at 720p. So, after couple of fiddling I rectified it using correct core clocks and mem clocks. I must thank techpowerup gpu database.

 

i wonder what the 8700hq will look like.
whether it will still be quad core or hexacore 8700hh.
or if Intel is waiting for ryzen mobile.

These low tdp intel 8 series won't be enough for hardcore computing.

My 6700hq pretty much holds 3.1ghz turbo for a long time, all 4 cores loaded 100%. I'd be surprised if these 8 gen can do the same.

 

Well the launch info is now out, rather disappointing they don't break down the turbo speeds by cores anymore. Just Base and "max turbo" speeds. Guess we'll have to wait until some benchmarks start showing up to see what speeds they will actually load at.

Taken from Anandtech

Base/Turbo

i7-8650U 1.9ghz/4.2ghz
i7-8550U 1.8ghz/4.0ghz
i5-8350U 1.7ghz/3.6ghz
i5-8250U 1.6ghz/3.4ghz

 

Severely under powered and under clocked. Might as well settle for Pentium CPU w/o turbo boost as they can maintain their clocks better than newer cpus. @Papusan See this.

 

Ryzen mobile isn't out. Why should Intel rush? And the competition is in the desktop segment now. AMD haven't been much used in laptops. Intel know this.
8700hq will have 6 cores and 2.0GHz as base clock Frequency (From rumors). I'm sure 4 cores boost will be at least on level as 7700Hq today. How high the Boost being depends on how many cores is taxed in load. But if some of the well known Windoze trash + useless OEM bloat run in the background, the Maximum Boost will be crippled.

 

Me wantz one of these! (vPro possible vulnerabilities make me nervous)

 

8th generation now includes, this quad core U kabylake refresh, the up and coming coffee lake (14nm++) and later canon lake (10nm).

 

Desktop users wanting to upgrade will be disappointed in the need for a new 300 series motherboard.

 

Never expected we could have 3 revisions processors on same MB I'm sure many have same opinion on this.

 

I think Ryzen TR and Ryzen 5,7 will be crushing Intel.

 

On prices, yeah. Not on performance!!

 

My information was incorrect, they can be configured at max. 25W TDP, not 28. At load on all 4 cores they probably just hit base clock speeds of current 15W U series CPUs (2.7-2.8GHz).

 

Everyone saying these would suck should read this early review. Appears to have the performance they should have

http://www.ultrabookreview.com/17801-intel-core-i5-8250u-benchmarks/

 

More preliminary benchmarks from notebookcheck shows these new CPU's even the lowest end one (i5 8250u) is as fast as a 45W Core i5 7300HQ. I'd say thats a pretty good increase in performance while staying in a 15W envelope.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel...by-Lake-R-series-launches-today.241768.0.html

 

While thermal throttling it will fallback to stock clocks and increase stutters during intense load. I can barely hit the TDP limit of HQ CPU because mine tops out at 37W to be precise instead of 45W.
We'd see TDP limit hitting frequently in TS. Don't you think @Mr. Fox @Papusan @hmscott

 

I hope they won't run too bad under heavy iGPU load, in machines without dGPU or eGPU...

 

indeed under sustained load they can't keep the top turbo boost clocks and settle on lower clocks once the tdp limits of 15W set in . It is possible to have a tdp up configuration of 28W which would be better on sustained loads but unlikely any vendor will implement that.

 

In the first link if you read the article

"The CPU maintains high Turbo speeds for a short while, which is corroborated with a package TDP of 25 W or higher, but after a few seconds it drops to the standard 15 W TDP and the frequencies drop to 2.2 – 2.3 GHz."

So you have a base speed of 1.6ghz and are getting a turbo speed that is 600-700mhz above the base clock. You can't expect it to turbo to its max speeds as those are quoted as single and dualcore turbo speeds, much like the current 15W cpu's. Also in the Ultrabook review article they tested 2 i5 8250U notebooks. 1 with dedicated graphics and 1 with integrated. As expected with dedicated grapgics the cpu could turbo boost higher and longer resulting in better performance.

Fact is there is ZERO downside with these new CPU's even though everyone keeps complaining that there is. They have been proven to be faster than the existing dual cores while keeping the same power consumption.

 

Indeed it is a great performance improvement over the dual core 15watt chips, especially in multi thread operations. The question now is the thermal profile, if it generates more heat or is about the same as the present dual cores.

 

What's the lead time on the performance oriented CPUs? 6 months?

 

It's not going to generate more heat, the CPU has a TDP design of 15W, meaning the cooling system needs to be able to dissipate that. There is no change from the previous TDP of 15W

Here is another site with some benchmarks showing the i7 8550u faster than the i7 7500u be a healthy margin

http://laptopmedia.com/comparisons/...0u-whats-so-special-about-the-new-generation/

 

I totally agree that the performance boost over the dual core U is amazing, that is fact. That was not what I was getting at. Of course it benchmarks a lot better than the dual core since it has double the cores and threads, but because of the 15W limit, it will turbo to the higher clocks only for a short period, because it will use up to 28W. So under sustained loads, like when gaming with eGPU, the clocks will likely stabilize at let´s say 2.0 - 2.4GHz, which is very respectable at 15w. Now if some vendors opt to sell ultrabooks with it configured TDPup to 28w, then the higher clocks can be sustained and it will be close to some 45watts HQ we have now under sustained load. Amazing what some competition will do, with ryzen mobile in the horizon, intel stepped up their game rather quickly. Now that the U chips are out, waiting for the 6 core HQ chips.....but mostly waiting for volta...haha...for an upgrade.

 

Depends if the OEM's don't crippling their jokebook with firmware due a tragedy of heatsink <Needs to> is nice words

 

Just ordered a Dell Inspiron 7000 13"
i7 8550U
16GB DDR4 2400
512GB NVME SSD

Should be here 2nd week of october. I'll have full benchmark and review then. Can't wait.

 

Don't use ThrottleStop & XTU to undervolt, I want to see real test from you. I hope you can prove us wrong but we're awaiting your benching results from OCCT, AIDA64 w/ HWINFO sensors readings on CPU, CPU TDP, PCH and SSD temps.

 

Both before and after undervolting readings would be great, no need waiting to tune it up right to get best performance and temps

 

I wasn't aware I was going to not do a real test.......ive never undervolted any of my recent laptops, at least not in the last 10 years. Love to see everyone so set in their ways that these cpus aren't any good. You'll be pleasantly surprised by their performance. I happen to have a mobile i7 3840qm laptop I can compare with as well.

 

I don't think your new lappie can be compared to a real workstation which looks ancient but still has plenty of raw power left in that beast.

 

It's not the CPU's that aren't good, it's the BIOS set voltage is a bit high these days, more than needed, and undervolting - tuning the voltage for lowest setting reduces the thermal load on the CPU, reducing temperatures.

If you don't undervolt it's pretty much a guarantee you are running about 10c hotter at 100% load than necessary.

Getting a good set of readings at stock, before tuning, is a good idea so you know how much tuning improves temperatures.

A CPU voltage offset of -100mV is a good starting point, and for many it's enough of a temperature drop to stop right there.

 

Ancient or not why can't I compare the package power draw between the 2 cpus? So i can see the better efficiency of a cpu that is about 3.5 generations newer?

 

Looking forward to your comparison(s).

Take care.

 

Looks like your conclusion is already written, self evident as it is to anyone who knows anything about the effect of cpu design evolution and lithography upon efficiency.

How much it does (or doesn't) beat a 4 year old CPU is where the interest lies. Or whether you have free performance on top of the default settings as you would with a 3840qm running constant 4ghz (whether or not it takes 60W to do that)

 

My 3840qm is locked so the most I ever get out of it is 3.5ghz at 45W and it doesn't quit hit the max temp of 105c

I can only get 1.5ghz at 15W under full load, from the reading online so far it seems around 2.2ghz is when the new quads sustain under full load while in the 15W power envelope. I'm got an arrival date of Oct 11th so that day can't come soon enough to get some results.

Of interest is the passmark page for the i5 8250

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-8250U+@+1.60GHz

Shows most cpu's benching around 8200 in passmark. For reference my 3840 got 9400 so they really aren't that far off given the power consumption. Yes I know passmark isn't the only benchmark in town but it is a point of reference i can use right now.

 

A review on i7-8550U & i5-8250U (in German):
https://www.computerbase.de/2017-09/core-i7-8550u-i5-8250u-test-kaby-lake-refresh-meilenstein/

10 Pass Cinebench R15


Cinebench R15 Multi-Core


Cinebench R15 Single-Core


Power Consumption

 

Looks like they are faster in ALL circumstances, despite all the naysayers, so please again tell me what is wrong with these cpu's

 

They are ULV (Ultra low voltage) CPU's, the one's in tablets and 2in1's and low performance laptops, low performance compared to desktop and even full laptop CPU's.

It's an impressive improvement, but to be fair there was a heck of a lot of room for improvement.

The same improvements haven't been shown for the desktop and laptop CPU's, pretty much just adding on cores and threads, upping TDP a tad, and reducing IPC in some things and improving it in others, pretty much a wash.

The real improvements come with Coffee Lake #2 in 2H18, that's the faster 6 cores and intro of the 8 cores for Intel. Probably not worth waiting for, but 2H18 is what we originally expected from Intel for Coffee Lake.

This Kabylake refresh for desktop / laptop CPU's is just tacking on a couple of cores to try to compete with AMD, and failing to impress.

Intel Core i7-8700K Coffee Lake Z370
http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/intel-core-i7-8700k-coffee-lake-z370.809268/

 

Its just cinebench test and not some gaming test using GTA V or even latest games on Low or medium GFX settings. Just seeing CB scores w/o any sensor info is a little hard to believe and even if the thermals are good, there are BIOS level limits put on CPU when the CPU hits a certain temp. threshold and sustained loads from LinPack or P95 or AIDA64.

 

Efficiency comes into play. 45W CPUs would need a beefier cooling.

 

Just a quick update as i'm just playing around with a few things. Looks like Dell did some awesome power management on the Inspiron I got. It allows the CPU to draw over 43W for a short period of time