The eDRAM should only appear on the K models, which come at a premium already; Intel have previously talked about possibly expanding the eDRAM onto other models.
Last edited by a moderator:
This is awesome news but once again we are stuck with a choice from Intel which results in a compromise whichever route you take. This should release around the same timeframe as Haswell-E so do you go for an 8 Core Haswell-E with no igp and no L4 or do you go for a likely much faster clocked 4 core Broadwell with Iris Pro?
I image the Broadwell will be the better bet for gaming but I still want my 8 cores!!
I image the Broadwell will be the better bet for gaming but I still want my 8 cores!!
I don't think it's going to release at the same time as Haswell-E.This is awesome news but once again we are stuck with a choice from Intel which results in a compromise whichever route you take. This should release around the same timeframe as Haswell-E so do you go for an 8 Core Haswell-E with no igp and no L4 or do you go for a likely much faster clocked 4 core Broadwell with Iris Pro?
I image the Broadwell will be the better bet for gaming but I still want my 8 cores!!
UniversalTruth
Veteran
Intel Broadwell graphics enhancements
http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2014/2014050101_Intel_Broadwell_graphics_enhancements.html
So, will it support hardware H265/HEVC decoding or not?
And if not, is this going to be a shit CPU for 4k or what?
I don't understand.
The Broadwell display controller utilizes higher display clocks for some interfaces, which allows it to support higher display resolutions. For instance, the maximum resolution for eDP 1.3 and DisplayPort 1.2 interfaces on "H" processors was increased to 4096x2304 at 60Hz. Higher display resolution, up to 3840x2160, is also supported by "U" series chips. Likewise, the maximum resolution for "Y" processors is 3840x2160 at @60Hz, however it is limited to 1 display, and using it results in increased power consumption.
This is gonna be a BIG disappointment as a CPU I think.
http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2014/2014050101_Intel_Broadwell_graphics_enhancements.html
So, will it support hardware H265/HEVC decoding or not?
And if not, is this going to be a shit CPU for 4k or what?
I don't understand.
The Broadwell display controller utilizes higher display clocks for some interfaces, which allows it to support higher display resolutions. For instance, the maximum resolution for eDP 1.3 and DisplayPort 1.2 interfaces on "H" processors was increased to 4096x2304 at 60Hz. Higher display resolution, up to 3840x2160, is also supported by "U" series chips. Likewise, the maximum resolution for "Y" processors is 3840x2160 at @60Hz, however it is limited to 1 display, and using it results in increased power consumption.
This is gonna be a BIG disappointment as a CPU I think.
Curiously, is there any hardware that supports full HEVC de/encoding yet? I was under the impression that everyone uses a hybrid (including Maxwell) as the spec is fairly new as hardware goes.
... what??And if not, is this going to be a shit CPU for 4k or what?
This is gonna be a BIG disappointment as a CPU I think.
Haswell was too heavy on EUs (10:1 vs. other folks with 8:1 or less ratios of compute:sampler) which Broadwell will rebalance to a more reasonable level. Haswell was rarely ever bottlenecked on ALU.
UniversalTruth
Veteran
So, it is just an ordinary CPU which will support/follow the standards. Would it be appropriate to say that the standards are disappointing?
60Hz I mean, I don't know why it is 60 and not 120 or any higher number.
It is delayed from Q1 2014 to Q4 2014/Q1 2015, making it basically a 2015 product. Almost a year, should have already been released.
Last edited by a moderator:
Blazkowicz
Legend
Get a VESA compatible mini-ITX instead?
I've checked what commercial low-watt CPU Intel has, and they sell the i3-4130T officially rated at 35 watts.
I wonder how it works with the biggest VESA compatible case and the most cooling you can afford there. It will murder the i5 NUC performance wise, quite possibly be faster than a Broadwell NUC.
(OT : I've just seen the NUC with Atom E3815, VGA + HDMI, 4Go built-in flash. Wow. An interesting thin client, point-of-sale etc.)
I've checked what commercial low-watt CPU Intel has, and they sell the i3-4130T officially rated at 35 watts.
I wonder how it works with the biggest VESA compatible case and the most cooling you can afford there. It will murder the i5 NUC performance wise, quite possibly be faster than a Broadwell NUC.
(OT : I've just seen the NUC with Atom E3815, VGA + HDMI, 4Go built-in flash. Wow
. An interesting thin client, point-of-sale etc.)Huh? An i3-4130 will "murder" a 15W i5-4350U in performance? I doubt the difference would be substantial at all (they have the same peak turbo clocks, or base clock for the i3) even assuming the i3 wins with the extra power budget. Certainly nothing that I'd define as "murder"
You're at about the limit of what you can cool with the ultrabook CPUs in the NUC-size chassis, so if you want higher-TDP processors you need a bigger enclosure (or something exotic/expensive). That's fine if that's what you need, but that's a different product and you can hardly fault the NUCs for being what they are.
Blazkowicz
Legend
I was looking at the 4250U - even then the single-thread performance will be very high when it can be sustained a fair bit, for one thing.
I don't really argue against the NUC, some may need to consider the form factors if they will have particular demands (e.g. CPU intensive computer-aided music). Doesn't take much math to estimate that if you load all 4 threads at 100% the 15W processor can eventually end up about twice slower as the 35W one.
Games may be rougher too. But still better than a lot of towers and laptops in current use for sure.
I could easily have one as my only PC computer (I like desktops afterall!)
But users have to evaluate their needs. There does exist a class of users who are not very technical and do want or sometimes need high multithreaded performance for photo editing, video editing and such ; they often stop at "Core i5" or "Core i7" and think that computer (most often a laptop) is the about the same beast as on full blown desktops.
I don't really argue against the NUC, some may need to consider the form factors if they will have particular demands (e.g. CPU intensive computer-aided music). Doesn't take much math to estimate that if you load all 4 threads at 100% the 15W processor can eventually end up about twice slower as the 35W one.
Games may be rougher too. But still better than a lot of towers and laptops in current use for sure.
I could easily have one as my only PC computer (I like desktops afterall!)
But users have to evaluate their needs. There does exist a class of users who are not very technical and do want or sometimes need high multithreaded performance for photo editing, video editing and such ; they often stop at "Core i5" or "Core i7" and think that computer (most often a laptop) is the about the same beast as on full blown desktops.
Agreed, but this has always been a problem. I used to really hate this but then I started to realize that folks choose a form factor first, and then look at specs rather than the other way around. Thus ultimately if they are fixated on getting a laptop, they're not comparing to any other form factor performance anyways so it's not as much of a practical issue as I once thought.
That said, I'd obviously prefer if they named everything on a continuous performance scale, but I doubt everyone is going to change to that at this point. At least they append "U" and "M" (for GPUs) and the like to the names now vs. in the past where mobile variants were often just called the same thing for a different chip :S
Blazkowicz
Legend
I can see that "4250U" is at least quite smaller than 4570 or 4670, and "core i3-4010U" much smaller than "4130" or "4330", so it's not too bad and there's a final letter when needed. And a final zero.
Previous gens made my head explode.
Previous gens made my head explode.
surface pro 3 on ars technica shows that it still uses haswell but have better battery life and thinner body. With broadwell, maybe smaller surface can surface
