New details emerge on Intel's upcoming Haswell CPU

[Shawn Knight]

Intel released Ivy Bridge earlier this year and although we aren’t expecting its successor until next year, it’s never too early to discuss when more details emerge. CPU World claims to have the latest on the package options we can expect to see from Haswell which includes CPU core count, graphics tier level and the number of memory channels (in that order) that will be available.

The publication notes that Intel will use 4+2+2 and 2+2+2 package options for desktop chips – none (at least initially) will feature the highest graphics, tier 3. All chips will use an LGA package and support DDR3 memory up to DDR3-1600 with a maximum capacity of up to 32GB.

Market	Cores	Graphics	Memory controllers	Package	Max RAM
Desktop	4	GT2	2	LGA	32 GB
Desktop	2	GT2	2	LGA	32 GB
Mobile (performance)	4	GT3	2	BGA	32 GB
Mobile (mainstream)	4	GT2	2	BGA / rPGA	32 GB
Mobile (mainstream)	2	GT2	2	BGA / rPGA	16 GB
Mobile (ULT)	2	GT3	2	BGA	16 GB
Mobile (ULT)	2	GT2	1	BGA	8 GB

On the mobile side, processors will be available in 4+3+2, 4+2+2 and 2+2+2 packages. We are hearing that processors with the highest level of graphics will only be available in BGA packages. This means it won’t be possible to upgrade notebooks using tier 1 or tier 2 graphics to a tier 3 chip. Furthermore, tier 3 chips won’t be upgradable to faster tier 3 processors. All mobile chips will have two memory controllers and support either 16GB or 32GB of total RAM.

The Ultra Light and Thin (ULT) processor category (which probably means Ultrabooks) will consist of dual-core only CPUs. One package will use the highest tier graphics while the other will use the mid-grade tier. Both will be built using the BGA package with maximum RAM set at 8GB for the mid-range package and 16GB for the higher-end package.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/49878-new-details-emerge-on-intels-upcoming-haswell-cpu.html

 

[likedamaster]

*Yawn* Call me when they finally get the 8-cores in.

 

[Guest]

@ likedamaster
Lol! You are acting pretty smug aren't you? There already are CPUs with even up to 10 cores by Intel which are the Xeon series. However, HOW many software nowadays for CONSUMERS actually does a good job of taking advantage of even 6 cores and not to mention 8, or even 10 cores? Not very many so there's really no benefit right now until more software developers at least take advantage of 4 cores. There are quite a bit of software that does but it's not "typical" yet.

 

[Guest]

Call you when they get 8 cores. Yan. Call me when they get 48 cores.

 

[Guest]

*Yawn* Call me when that 1,000-core is being manufactured for consumers.

 

[Guest]

Show me a 6+ core CPU out of intel for ~$200. I think I'll be waiting a long time with AMD effectively out of the high performance CPU game.

[Given, I'm sure haswell will improve ipc across the board, but the only reason we haven't seen 6+ core cpus for $200 is because AMD doesn't have its act together.]

 

[hahahanoobs]

[Intel] Show me a stock 4.0GHz clock speed and an architecture that has support and optimizations for RAM frequencies over DDR3 1600MHz. It's good to know I don't need more than 1600MHz as far as saving money goes, but give me a reason to upgrade and I'll jump on it.

 

[Zeromus]

@ likedamaster
Lol! You are acting pretty smug aren't you? There already are CPUs with even up to 10 cores by Intel which are the Xeon series. However, HOW many software nowadays for CONSUMERS actually does a good job of taking advantage of even 6 cores and not to mention 8, or even 10 cores? Not very many so there's really no benefit right now until more software developers at least take advantage of 4 cores. There are quite a bit of software that does but it's not "typical" yet.

Yeah, what an uninformed individual. Unless this guy likes gaming while he runs a web server.

 

[Jad Chaar]

I dont get why intel keeps focusing on the graphics... just let nvidia do that and just make cpus. crap graphics are taking over the industry... intel is trying to sell crappy graphics in ultrabooks for >800

 

[cliffordcooley]

I dont get why intel keeps focusing on the graphics... just let nvidia do that and just make cpus. crap graphics are taking over the industry... intel is trying to sell crappy graphics in ultrabooks for >800

Seriously just because nVidia and AMD makes better dedicated graphics doesn't mean Intel should stop making better integrated graphics with their CPU's. Intel's integrated graphics is more than enough graphical power for some people. As long as Intel can keep up with production environment, I see no reason why they should try competing with nVidia and AMD dedicated graphics. At least Intel is raising the minimum performance bar with each integrated graphical performance boost.

 

[dividebyzero]

...but give me a reason to upgrade and I'll jump on it.

There are none...

However for the enthusiast, a 10% CPU performance (clock-for-clock) increase, the addition of AVX2 and FMA3, instruction sets, and transactional memory support promise a reasonable speed up over Ivy Bridge.

 

[Jad Chaar]

Seriously just because nVidia and AMD makes better dedicated graphics doesn't mean Intel should stop making better integrated graphics with their CPU's. Intel's integrated graphics is more than enough graphical power for some people. As long as Intel can keep up with production environment, I see no reason why they should try competing with nVidia and AMD dedicated graphics. At least Intel is raising the minimum performance bar with each integrated graphical performance boost.

true true. but still, I feel that all these graphical additions will just reduce battery life. they should focus more on making more efficient cpus and then move to gpu. but yeah this is a good step

 

[dividebyzero]

true true. but still, I feel that all these graphical additions will just reduce battery life. they should focus more on making more efficient cpus and then move to gpu. but yeah this is a good step

Ivy Bridge fixed TDP's are 45, 55 and 65w. Haswell's fixed TDP parts are 37, 47 or 57w (I.e. an 8 watt lowering across the board) Programmable TDP parts should be at or lower than IB ( 14W cTDP down, 17W nominal, 25W cTDP up) for the ULV parts.

 

[Guest]

Yes yes yes. And all while this happens people will try to sell you expensive service's through a cloud medium, so unnecessary as you wait a year and your personal computer can out perform a data centre, it doesn't make much sense, especially in the video game sector.

my two cents anyways

 

[3DCGMODELER]

*Yawn* Call me when they finally get the 8-cores in.

ditto