I Can Hazwell?

Yes, I didn't see any views of the hardware innards until yesterday, it's a seriously impressive piece of kit, although I wonder how much those GPUs will throttle exactly - that cooler doesn't look nearly sufficient to keep everything within spec at full burn unless the fan was to have the noise level of a gas turbine of course. ;) Ah... Such is the price of neatness. That, and zero internal expandability. :p
 
Yes, I didn't see any views of the hardware innards until yesterday, it's a seriously impressive piece of kit, although I wonder how much those GPUs will throttle exactly - that cooler doesn't look nearly sufficient to keep everything within spec at full burn unless the fan was to have the noise level of a gas turbine of course. ;) Ah... Such is the price of neatness. That, and zero internal expandability. :p

I don't know what's the TDP of this system, but if it's some where around 1000 W (I think that's a reasonable estimation), then a 15 cm fan @ 1500 RPM should have no problem handling the heat assuming the huge triangular heat sink is effective.

[EDIT] Note that most ATX system's problem with heat dissipation is that it's difficult to make a consistent airflow over those parts which generate heat. Take a look at the position of harddisks, CPU, and GPUs. They are not well positioned for heat dissipation. That's why we need a lot of small fans in an ATX system.
 
Ivy-Bridge-E was confirmed to be up to twelves cores a while ago IIRC. Some people are confusing the desktop variants with the xeon variants (only the former is rumored to be restricted to 6 cores, and apple certainly is using xeons (E5 Ivy - I guess that's the whole reason the box isn't available yet).
Yes, IvyBridge-E based Xeons will have up to 12 cores (24 threads). This was mentioned in some of Intel's roadmaps (last year?). I am pretty sure Apple is using one of those.
 
assuming the huge triangular heat sink is effective.
That assumption may be quite a stretch - there's not that much surface area in the sink all things considered, and it's all laminar flow - most of the air moving through the sink won't ever touch a metal surface. From what I've seen - and it's not nearly enough IMO - the sink simply looks to be one large lump of aluminium. No vapor chambers to spread the heat over the entire side, nor even a copper insert from the looks of it. Thus the sink will have a giant hotspot right over the ASIC, and not much of a gradient outwards from there. Solid chunks of metal used as coolers went out of fashion - with everybody except Apple it seems - right around the P4 era because it just wasn't any damn good really.

Very neat design as far as visual neatness and clever use of space goes, but thermally it looks fucking terrible IMO.
 
I'm pretty sure their engineers have looked it over twice to make sure it is sufficient.

Hell, a few select companies have already been using them and are raving, e.g. Pixar, Blackmagic Design and The Foundry.

I like the reboot of the workstation, seeing as many tasks are suitable for GPGPU, especially in science, video-editing and photography.

It still doesn't change the fact that the processor used is not based on Haswell *cough*.
 
Yes, IvyBridge-E based Xeons will have up to 12 cores (24 threads). This was mentioned in some of Intel's roadmaps (last year?). I am pretty sure Apple is using one of those.

The full 12 core version at 3.x GHz will probably cost over $2k though and have a high TDP (if the top workstation variant doesn't use 10 cores)
 
Yes, IvyBridge-E based Xeons will have up to 12 cores (24 threads). This was mentioned in some of Intel's roadmaps (last year?). I am pretty sure Apple is using one of those.

The Xeons are IvyBridge-EP/EN which like you said will be 12 cores. The ENs I think is for the older socket. There will be IvyBridge-EX late next year which will have 15 cores.

The IvyBridge-E will just be six cores. I read that IvyBridge-E is not a harvest die of IvyBridge-EP with six cores disable. Six cores CPU should be pretty small, but I think Intel will charge the same price as current models for them.

Intel is really slacking off without competition in high performance area. This is like a one-year delay.

Haswell-E doesn't look that attractive either. Only two more cores, where Ivy-EP is already at 12 cores. And another year of wait, IF they stick with their schedule. As far as I'm concern the enthusiast desktop is dead. Performance improvement is so small for a lot of money.

So at this point I think I'm going to go with dual socket Ivy Xeon build. Hopefully I can get at least 12 cores, 64 GB RAM, some SSDs and low end GPU for less than five grands.
 
The IvyBridge-E will just be six cores. I read that IvyBridge-E is not a harvest die of IvyBridge-EP with six cores disable. Six cores CPU should be pretty small, but I think Intel will charge the same price as current models for them.
Most people will refer to "IvyBridge-E" as the whole family of chips for lga2011 as there's not really any distinction you could draw to IVB-EP - IIRC the idea is these are the single-socket parts (so some xeons also fit there).
For SNB lga2011 there were actually two chips, EP-4 and EP-8, with 4 and 8 cores respectively. So the 6-core SNB i7 was using the 8-core die. I'm not entirely sure what other differences are between those two chips (apart of course from the l3), possibly the smaller one doesn't have all QPI links (I have no idea what die is actually used in what chip, except of course chips with more than 4 cores must use the larger one, you could probably figure it out with enough digging in the datasheets).
Not sure about IVB-E, but presumably there's still two versions and since the larger is 12 cores the smaller being 6 cores sounds right to me, hence probably all i7 chips would use that (might still have some l3 cache parts disabled possibly but not any cores).
 
Haswell-E doesn't look that attractive either. Only two more cores, where Ivy-EP is already at 12 cores.
Eight core Haswell (i7 consumer model), should fare quite well against a 12 core Ivy-EP, and be much cheaper (compared to those Xeons). Haswell should win in vector processing performance at least (AVX2+FMA). TSX should also help in heavily multithreaded server/HPC workloads (assuming software is patched to support it). The 8 core Haswell would likely also have a clock advantage over the 12 core Ivy Bridge. I wouldn't expect the difference to be huge.
 
Eight core Haswell (i7 consumer model), should fare quite well against a 12 core Ivy-EP, and be much cheaper (compared to those Xeons). Haswell should win in vector processing performance at least (AVX2+FMA). TSX should also help in heavily multithreaded server/HPC workloads (assuming software is patched to support it). The 8 core Haswell would likely also have a clock advantage over the 12 core Ivy Bridge. I wouldn't expect the difference to be huge.

Won't be in practice.

Ivy Bridge E: Q4 2013
Ivy Bridge EP: Q3 2013

Then a year later you'd have Haswell E vs Haswell EP. Your comparison then would be 12 core Ivy Bridge EP versus 4 core Haswell.
 
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7085/the-2013-macbook-air-review-13inch/6

Light Workload said:
This is just ridiculous. Apple claims 12 hours, we tend to test a little more strenuous than Apple does and ended up with just over 11 hours of battery life on a single charge. These highly idle cases end up dominated by display power, which is why we actually see the smallest improvement in battery life over the previous generation here (~35%, normalized for battery capacity).

Medium Workload said:
Just under 9 hours on a single charge, an increase of 54.5% when you normalize for battery capacity. What the world would’ve done if Haswell ULT hit prior to the creation of the iPad...

Heavy Workload said:
Even normalizing for battery capacity changes, the new 13-inch MacBook Air increases battery life by 65% over the previous model.

:runaway:
 
Nice! too bad Apple still hasn't made the switch to decent display panels for their Air line of notebooks.

It's seriously annoying when the choice of notebooks with proper display are so limited, when looking for a decent upgrade for an old dinosaur like an IBM Thinkpad T43 with IPS panel.
I was disappointed as well. I expected Retina displays, or at least something better than 1366x768 TN displays in this year's models (a good 1600x900 IPS panel would have been a huge improvement for the 13" models).

Currently this seems to be the best 13" laptop to buy if you want a good display:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/20/samsung-ativ-book-9-plus-and-ativ-book-9-lite-hands-on/

Haswell ULV (up to i7), 3200x1800 display, 256 GB SSD, 8 GB RAM. 12 hour battery life. No price announced yet (but likely around 2000$+). Too bad this doesn't have the Crystalwell 128 MB L4 cache. I would personally wait and see the specs of the new 13" Retina Macbook, if you are looking for a lightweight 13" laptop. Apple might be able to fit the Crystallwell inside the slightly larger body.
 
I was disappointed as well. I expected Retina displays, or at least something better than 1366x768 TN displays in this year's models (a good 1600x900 IPS panel would have been a huge improvement for the 13" models).

Currently this seems to be the best 13" laptop to buy if you want a good display:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/20/samsung-ativ-book-9-plus-and-ativ-book-9-lite-hands-on/

Haswell ULV (up to i7), 3200x1800 display, 256 GB SSD, 8 GB RAM. 12 hour battery life. No price announced yet (but likely around 2000$+). Too bad this doesn't have the Crystalwell 128 MB L4 cache. I would personally wait and see the specs of the new 13" Retina Macbook, if you are looking for a lightweight 13" laptop. Apple might be able to fit the Crystallwell inside the slightly larger body.

looks like a reasonable choice, provided it has at least 1 SO-DIMM slot which can support future 16GB modules. 8GB won't cut it in 5 years... let alone right now when doing virtualization.
 
Don't hold your breath for GT3e in the 13" retina, most likely getting the 28W. Apple has never made a 13" model with equal performance to the 15".

I would love to be wrong, but I don't see them cannibalizing the 15".

I am really curious about GT3 performance w/o L4, how will DDR3 bandwith hold up in games?
 
The 13" MacBook Air has a 1440x900 display, just for clarification.

You probably want the new 13" MacBook Pro with retina display anyway, once it gets Haswell as well.
 
Don't hold your breath for GT3e in the 13" retina, most likely getting the 28W. Apple has never made a 13" model with equal performance to the 15".
The existing 13" retina has a 35W dual core CPU (Ivy Bridge 3320M with HD 4000). If Apple wants to go down in size (make it closer to Air) I agree that the the 28W dual core with Iris 5100 (4558U) is an obvious choice. It's a nice 200 MHz clock boost + the extra ~10%+ IPC from Haswell. The GPU has 2.5x raw peak performance (same max clocks, 40 EUs vs 16 EUs). However the GPU would be very much bandwidth bound without the Crystalwell L4 cache (Iris Pro 5200 is the only one with it).

What interests me the most in the 40 EU configurations (HD 5000 and Iris 5100) is the potentially improved performance/watt compared to the 16/20 EU HD 4XXX models. As you have twice as many EUs, you only need to clock them halfway to get equal performance. A HD 5000/5100 running at 650 MHz would equal HD 4600 running at full throttle (1300 MHz). Indeed the base (lowest supported) frequency of all 5000 model GPUs is 200 MHz, while it is 400 MHz for all 4000 series GPUs. Intel seems to be spending transistors here mainly to save power, and additionally to get some small performance gains where the bandwidth allows.
I would love to be wrong, but I don't see them cannibalizing the 15".
I am not personally interested in full size laptops (15" and bigger). I am comparing the 13" retina to the 12"/13" windows laptops and to the 13" Macbook Air. There is a huge market for smaller laptops, and the buyers there do not see the 15" model as a direct competitor for the 13" model. I doubt Apple wants to hurt their presence in the small form factor laptop territory in order to sell another product to a separate group or persons (with different needs).
I am really curious about GT3 performance w/o L4, how will DDR3 bandwith hold up in games?
2013 Macbook Air is already launched, and it has HD 5000 graphics (GT3 with 40 EUs).

The new Air has 12 hour battery life, so at least it seems that 40 EUs help keeping the GPU clock down to save battery life. Also the 1.3 GHz (2.6 GHz turbo) Haswell seems to be keeping up with the last year's 1.8 GHz (2.8 GHz turbo) Ivy Bridge surprisingly well (equal performance in most benchmarks). Lower clocks again save battery (in addition to Haswell's other power saving features). 2013 model brings huge gains to battery life. Haswell (and HD 5000) is working very well for low powered devices. Samsung is also promising 12 hour battery life for their Haswell based 3200x1800 resolution Ultrabook. It's looking very good so far for Haswell. Intel did a very good job indeed :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am not personally interested in full size laptops (15" and bigger). I am comparing the 13" retina to the 12"/13" windows laptops and to the 13" Macbook Air. There is a huge market for smaller laptops, and the buyers there do not see the 15" model as a direct competitor for the 13" model. I doubt Apple wants to hurt their presence in the small form factor laptop territory in order to sell another product to a separate group or persons (with different needs).
Me neither, which I why I bought last year's 13" retina. However I don't know anyone else who did, while I know about a dozen people with the 15" and most got it for the extra cores and GPU. A relatively weak 13" model keeps the price of the 15" inflated to maximize profit from people who think they need the performance and screen size.

A dual core GT3e model could work, they could could still pitch the 15" quad to the Apple "pro" crowd while giving us the L4 but I haven't seen any news on it in months. I guess they figured going forward a mobile dual core CPU would bottleneck gaming enough not to bother with the eDRAM, whether it be lack of cores or the cores getting down clocked to allow for more GPU TDP.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7113/2013-macbook-air-core-i5-4250u-vs-core-i7-4650u

kuUnOYa.png
 
Back
Top