TechSpot

Leaked slides detail Intel's 2013 Haswell architecture

By Matthew
Nov 9, 2011
Post New Reply
  1. We're still roughly five months away from Sandy Bridge's die shrink, Ivy Bridge, but Intel is already preaching the virtues of its 2013 microprocessor technology. Codenamed Haswell, the architecture was…

    Read the whole story
     
  2. dikbozo

    dikbozo TS Enthusiast Posts: 106

    "the chips will require entirely new motherboards"

    Intel and super duper new chip!! Surprise Fn Surprise Fn Surprise.

    1155, 1156,1366 for i7 series

    1155, 1156 for i5 and i3 series.

    not all chipsets support all CPUs in series. Revisions changing the rules sprinkled through the CPU lifetime. Whatever the benefits of the 'New Latest Greatest' (or is that Gratest as in to grate as on one's nerves?) is it worth the constantly changing landscape of motherboard chipsets and uncertain upgrade paths?

    Here we go again with yet another iteration from Mount Intel. I keep expecting to see Rambus resurrected one of these days.
     
  3. Win7Dev

    Win7Dev TS Booster Posts: 365   +40

    Why can't intel just use the same sockets in a different chipset? I understand the reason for a chipset change, but not so much on the socket.
     
  4. ikesmasher

    ikesmasher TS Evangelist Posts: 1,949   +381

    Socket change makes no sense. but whatev.
     
  5. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,910   +716

    What would be the point ? How would you use an Ivy Bridge or Sandy Bridge CPU on a motherboard whose CPU voltage regulation has been removed because it is now part of the Haswell CPU ? (See this article from three days ago )
    Haswell schematic

    From the VR-Zone article:
    Hence the decreased pin count of the socket. Haswell is simply continuing Intel's design philosophy of moving all functionality to the CPU package - what started with an integrated memory controller is now moving closer to a system on a chip (SoC)

    See above...unless you're just trolling, in which case go for gold.
     
  6. red1776

    red1776 Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe Posts: 5,906   +90

    Do you think this is standard PR or have they solved signaling down to 10-14nm yet?
    I am assuming that tri-gate has good deal to do with this if so.
     
  7. LinkedKube

    LinkedKube TechSpot Project Baby Posts: 4,265   +41

    AMD tried that, you see where it got them!
     
  8. mount intel needs to make more money with every new chip they put out. can't blame them since that's the way they want to do things in a company's perspective. who wouldn't want to make more bucks from their brain? It's not mother Teressa orphanage it's freaking intel!
     
  9. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,910   +716

    That I'm not sure of. What is known is that 22nm (and presumeably tri-gate transistors) works, since Intel already have working silicon of Haswell.
    As far as I'm aware 14nm (Broadwell) is still set for double-pattening immersion lithography- so should be a known quantity. As far as 10nm is concerned that requires EUV to be viable. Intel are already on record as saying that their cadence might slip due to tooling not being ready. From what I gather EUV seems to be making steady progress, and Intel have already signed up for ASML's next-gen NXE:3300 lithography tool...so assuming that ASML get the throughput ironed out, and more importantly a viable metrology tool for inspecting EUV masks for defects eventuates then it becomes a matter of waiting for each branch of the process to blend into a viable process ( microarchiture, EUV tools, calibration and QC)...how critical the timing is probably depends on the what kind of manufacturer competition factors are in play in 2018 or so.

    As far as I'm aware signalling on what Intel have planned should be viable down to 10-12 x the thickness of the silicon atom -which should be ~5-6nm

    /man, thats a sh$@load of links!

    EDIT: Sub-10nm finFET process discussed here pdf. I think we covered some of this in an earlier thread (ostensively about Bulldozer I believe) between me, Archean and yourself.
     
  10. @supersmashbrada: I can't tell if you're joking or not. AMD being the underdog has absolutely no relation to them choosing to keep supporting current sockets.
     
  11. LinkedKube

    LinkedKube TechSpot Project Baby Posts: 4,265   +41

    You completely missed the point. Who said anything about supporting current sockets. What current socket? How old is AM3? Riddle me this batman...riddle me this.
     
     
  12. ET3D

    ET3D TechSpot Paladin Posts: 982   +31

    Sales?

    I'm sure AMD got quite a few sales thanks to the compatibility. Without it Intel might have have had even more market share. At most points in time in the past couple of years Intel was a more attractive choice for a new PC, but if you need more processing power and can just upgrade the CPU without having to buy other upgrades that often trumps the advantages of the competition. I'm running a Phenom II X6 on an AM2+ board and I'm quite happy with that.
     
  13. The ONLY reason AMD carries over sockets is because their weren't enough architectural changes to the die to warrant a new socket. Not to mention, their chipsets haven't been anything to get excited over either. Trust me, if AMD wasn't in the rough, the tables would quickly turn. AMD is not keeping up this socket compatibility for your benefit. If you believe that, then god help us all.
     
  14. spydercanopus

    spydercanopus TS Guru Posts: 802   +87

    PCH is going onto the CPU die. Not much left... can wifi fit inside a cpu die? lol
     
  15. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,910   +716

    Yes.
    And I/O (southbridge) as well as on-die stacked RAM integration probably isn't that far away.

    No doubt. But that was then, this is now. Very few people I know went with Bulldozer and opted to use an 890/870 chipset board.
    Compatibility is largely a myth now in any case. AMD's 45nm line is now on death row, and BD- whilst not requiring a new socket, does require a new motherboard. Socket FM1 is a one-hit wonder likely to have a shorter lifespan than any Intel socket in commercial use...assuming AMD's Trinity timetable is to be believed - and that, based on AMD's less than accurate portrayal of Bulldozer is by no mean a given
    Looking backward doesn't stop you tripping over what's sitting in front of you though does it? Expecting AMD to keep putting R&D into Athlon II/Phenom II and keeping that compatibility/upgrade path open ? Where's the upgrade path for people that bought into an FM1/Llano system ?
    The forums are awash with people who bought into 990FX/990X/970 chipset motherboards solely on the strength of AMD's promised BD performance, can you categorically say that AMD and motherboard vendors wont pull the same stunt again with Piledriver, Steamroller and Excavator ?
    I'm sure with customers who think like yourself, it's only a matter of time before AMD's sales pick up I guess.
     
  16. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,910   +716

    Took a while, but it looks like ASML and Intel are finally moving apace with EUV tooling...has it been eight months already?
     


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.