Intel Broadwell Thread

[Khato]

sort of weird they do it on the same day.

It's a smart move by Apple as they know that pretty much everyone will cover their event over Intel's. So they possibly get slightly better attendance (IDF draws a far more diverse crowd than an Apple event) while stealing some of the publicity that'd otherwise be left all to Intel.

The IGP.

They're gradually giving more information. They showed 14nm's improvement on a test chip at IDF13. They gave an overview of Broadwell and 14nm a month ago. Now at IFA with multiple companies announcing designs with the chip, they're announcing the real-world benefits of Core M and the SKUs. At IDF we'll probably get a full architectural and 14nm disclosure. Maybe we'll get an official roadmap. We'll get Cherry Trail. We'll get a 10nm wafer.

Sure there will be a more in-depth presentation regarding Broadwell graphics. But that's of little general interest. It'd just be somewhat odd for IDF to be nothing more than providing a greater level of detail regarding previous announcements... Just somewhat though, since technically it is a developer forum meant to provide that information to their partners.

Cherry Trail is the only new item that I'm expecting to see, which just doesn't seem like much. I'd be extremely surprised if there was anything of substance on 10nm though as it's still quite early for that. I guess Grantley should be released at IDF, so that'd be something. But yeah, just seems kinda odd to provide so much that was expected to be revealed at IDF beforehand unless there are major unexpected announcements. Of course that's likely just wishful thinking given that, if I recall correctly, last year's IDF was relatively dull save for Baytrail.

 

[liahos1]

It's a smart move by Apple as they know that pretty much everyone will cover their event over Intel's. So they possibly get slightly better attendance (IDF draws a far more diverse crowd than an Apple event) while stealing some of the publicity that'd otherwise be left all to Intel.

sad though because they are suppose to be partners. would be much simpler if intel got their act together in mobile and built something that apple couldnt ignore. instead intel is forced to commoditize the tablet market to protect their pc business, partner with fossil, sms audio etc for wearables and sell basebands to samsung.

apple should realize that ultimately ppl buy their products because of the seamless - just works - nature of their products and the richness of their ecosystem and that the soc is just one of many factors in that.

intel needs to realize that they need to build something apple has to put in their mobile products lest they lose competitiveness from a performance pov.

 

[witeken]

Sure there will be a more in-depth presentation regarding Broadwell graphics. But that's of little general interest. It'd just be somewhat odd for IDF to be nothing more than providing a greater level of detail regarding previous announcements... Just somewhat though, since technically it is a developer forum meant to provide that information to their partners.

Cherry Trail is the only new item that I'm expecting to see, which just doesn't seem like much. I'd be extremely surprised if there was anything of substance on 10nm though as it's still quite early for that. I guess Grantley should be released at IDF, so that'd be something. But yeah, just seems kinda odd to provide so much that was expected to be revealed at IDF beforehand unless there are major unexpected announcements. Of course that's likely just wishful thinking given that, if I recall correctly, last year's IDF was relatively dull save for Baytrail.

We should see plenty of information about Cherry Trail.

But that's not exciting of course, so here's my conspiracy theory: Apple will launch an iPad Pro with Intel Core M Inside. We've had tons of iPhone leaks, but nothing about the iPad, so it's possible (but not really).

 

[Fjodor2001]

But that's not exciting of course, so here's my conspiracy theory: Apple will launch an iPad Pro with Intel Core M Inside.

How would such a device be able to compete in the tablet space? I think it would be too expensive. Broadwell-M alone is $281.

 

[Khato]

sad though because they are suppose to be partners. would be much simpler if intel got their act together in mobile and built something that apple couldnt ignore. instead intel is forced to commoditize the tablet market to protect their pc business, partner with fossil, sms audio etc for wearables and sell basebands to samsung.

Quite true. Especially with respect to Intel now playing a major part in turning the performance tablet into a commodity part. In that respect I can easily see the major players who were enjoying the obscene margins of the premium tablet segment lamenting the fact that they didn't cooperate better with Intel. Because it's not just that Intel's offering an SoC/total BoM at a comparable price to SoC's using an A7 and half the graphics performance. No, in addition to that Intel is offering engineering aid and a top notch Android experience which can result in a surprisingly premium feeling product for an entry level price.

Which is actually a good move by Intel as I'd expect it to hasten the decline of premium Android tablets - why are consumers going to pay twice as much or more for a tablet that can't do anything more? That in turns opens up the market for the premium tablet-like experience offered exclusively by Intel that actually can do more. With the key difference being that it's Intel who gets to reap the obscene margins rather than the device manufacturer.

apple should realize that ultimately ppl buy their products because of the seamless - just works - nature of their products and the richness of their ecosystem and that the soc is just one of many factors in that.

intel needs to realize that they need to build something apple has to put in their mobile products lest they lose competitiveness from a performance pov.

Yeah, unfortunately the above only really applies to the non-Apple market. Those infected by the iOS obsession will continue to pay the premium even if it doesn't gain them anything over the Android/Windows alternatives available at under half the price. The only way I see Intel getting into Apple's iOS territory is if Samsung and TSMC drop the ball on future process nodes. Otherwise there will continue to be a divide between Apple's products for quite some time.

 

[Khato]

But that's not exciting of course, so here's my conspiracy theory: Apple will launch an iPad Pro with Intel Core M Inside. We've had tons of iPhone leaks, but nothing about the iPad, so it's possible (but not really).

While I have no expectation whatsoever of such, that's actually been one of my favorite conspiracy theories for the last two years now. Why? Well, just read in between the lines with respect to the time frame in which Intel would have needed to pursue the Core-M Broadwell variant and that interesting rumor from late 2012 of Intel manufacturing iPhone SoCs in exchange for Apple using x86 in the iPad. Needless to say it's an interesting coincidence. And if it somehow were true I wouldn't expect there to be the slightest hint of it until it happened.

How would such a device be able to compete in the tablet space? I think it would be too expensive. Broadwell-M alone is $281.

Eh, 64 GB iPad Air is $699 while the 64 GB Surface Pro 3 (with a supposedly $281 i3-4020Y) is $799. It could definitely compete, it'd just require either Apple or Intel to take a hit on their margins.

 

[Sweepr]

New articles about Core M.

Intel’s Core M Strategy: CPU Specifications for 9mm Fanless Tablets and 2-in-1 Devices

The first wave of three Core M parts will all be dual core flavors, with HD 5300 graphics and all within a 4.5W TDP. For Core M Intel is no longer quoting the SDP terminology due to the new design.

[...] It's interesting to note that Intel informed us that the 1k unit pricing will be the same for all three processors: $281. Obviously these chips are going to end up in hybrids, tablets, and laptops that come pre-built, so the actual pricing will vary by OEM and whatever deals they have with Intel. But in general, Intel seems to be saying that OEMs can choose any of the three chips based on their power/thermal targets.

In the processor graphics section in the shot above, there clearly looks like 12 repeated units, with each representing two EUs (Execution Units). In our dive into the architecture in early August, it was stated that the minimum configuration here would be as a result of Broadwell taking 8 EUs per sub-slice, with the minimum configuration being three sub-slices, making 24 in total. This comes in combination with an increase in the L1 cache and samplers relative to the number of EUs, allowing for 25% more sampling throughput per EU.

Intel used the above slide in their presentations and drew particular attention to the power consumption of the audio during HD video playback (the orange bar on the top comparison). As part of Core M, Intel is reducing power consumption of the audio segment of the system from 100s of milliwatts down to single-digit milliwatts by integrating an audio digital signaling processor (DSP) onto the die. This is what Intel refers to as its Smart Sound Technology, and is designed to shift the majority of the audio processing onto a configured part of the die which can process at lower power.

www.anandtech.com/show/8475/intels-core-m-strategy-cpu-specifications-for-9mm-fanless-tablets

Intel's Broadwell Core M Processor: New Details, SKUs and Specifics

www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-broadwell-core-m,27596.html

While I have no expectation whatsoever of such, that's actually been one of my favorite conspiracy theories for the last two years now. Why? Well, just read in between the lines with respect to the time frame in which Intel would have needed to pursue the Core-M Broadwell variant and that interesting rumor from late 2012 of Intel manufacturing iPhone SoCs in exchange for Apple using x86 in the iPad. Needless to say it's an interesting coincidence. And if it somehow were true I wouldn't expect there to be the slightest hint of it until it happened.

Eh, 64 GB iPad Air is $699 while the 64 GB Surface Pro 3 (with a supposedly $281 i3-4020Y) is $799. It could definitely compete, it'd just require either Apple or Intel to take a hit on their margins.

Also Intel expects Core M powered devices to start at $599 (only $100 more than the base 16GB 9.7'' iPad and cheaper than the Surface Pro 3).

 

[jpiniero]

$281? Really Intel? To give you an idea, the 64 GB iPad Air's entire BOM is $290. Needless to say, Apple using Core M in a tablet isn't happening, and I am seriously wondering now if Apple will even bother with using Core M in a Macbook Air and just wait until they move OSX to ARM.

Intel seriously needs to learn that Intel pricing isn't going to work; and anything to try to change that is only going to lose them more money.

 

[JDG1980]

$281? Really Intel? To give you an idea, the 64 GB iPad Air's entire BOM is $290. Needless to say, Apple using Core M in a tablet isn't happening, and I am seriously wondering now if Apple will even bother with using Core M in a Macbook Air and just wait until they move OSX to ARM.

Intel seriously needs to learn that Intel pricing isn't going to work; and anything to try to change that is only going to lose them more money.

Those prices are purely pro forma. I've seen full Mini-ITX motherboards with Atom and Celeron chips that were cheaper at retail than the "Tray" price listed on Intel's website for just the chip. Rest assured that Apple isn't going to be paying those prices, or anything close to it.

 

[lefty2]

New articles about Core M.
...

Also, this:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014...-get-broadwell-will-need-to-wait-for-skylake/

On the desktop, the Broadwell architecture will be limited to high-end processors.

 

[meloz]

$281? Really Intel?

New Intel slogan: Failure inside.

Another stupid pricing decision. Another dead-on-arrival product. Another wasted generation.
Intel are pricing for a segment that does not exist and has no reason to exist. Benchmarks aside, there is no reason for consumers to buy an expensive Broadwell-Y based device when far cheaper ARM solutions do 'good enough' job for them.

Unfortunately Intel are so blinded by their need to protect profit margins that they constantly cripple Atom, and are now trying to shove expensive core based CPUs down ODM's throat. Not going to happen.

The market for premium tablets has been reduced to two players (effectively): Apple with their idevice and whichever Samsung Galaxy Tablet is their halo product for this quarter. The rest of the market is in a free fall towards lowest cost CPUs and SoCs.

Apple have no reason to buy anything from Intel when their in-house investment in ARM is working out so well. And one Samsung tablet alone will not have the sales volume to justify the cost to R&D for products like Broadwell-Y.

Windows based devices are also a non-starter: they simply do not bring anything new and beneficial to the table for consumers. Few years ago, the ability to use "x86" software on your tablet might have been a talking point, but now there is no shortage of native software for ARM and no need for consumers to go looking elsewhere.

Intel need to quit crippling Atom and unleash it at <$50. That is the only way they can hope to gain any traction in the tablet and smartgadget segment. Products like Core-M look very nice in presentation slides but one quick look at ebay and retail stores tells you consumers have no interest in such overpriced devices.

Unlike desktop -where Intel have an effective monopoly- in the tablet segment you cannot force consumers to buy overpriced solutions. When will Intel learn this simple lesson. The more time they waste with such mispriced products the more time they give to their ARM rivals to become stronger.

 

[Ajay]

Eh, 64 GB iPad Air is $699 while the 64 GB Surface Pro 3 (with a supposedly $281 i3-4020Y) is $799. It could definitely compete, it'd just require either Apple or Intel to take a hit on their margins.

And this is why it won't happen yet - just like a fab deal for Apple ARM hasn't happened yet. Neither company wants to take a hit right now. If more pressure hit either company, then maybe we'll see a change. Right now, Apple seems to really like owning the entire IOS stack from hardware to (some) applications. Their heavy vertical integration is paying off, in terms of profits.

 

[Khato]

Those prices are purely pro forma. I've seen full Mini-ITX motherboards with Atom and Celeron chips that were cheaper at retail than the "Tray" price listed on Intel's website for just the chip. Rest assured that Apple isn't going to be paying those prices, or anything close to it.

I would have hoped this was common knowledge by now, but apparently it isn't. The prices listed on ark.intel.com only serve two purposes. One is to grant those consumers who are buying a pre-built computer and paying for a processor upgrade the illusion that the OEM is charging a reasonable price for such. The other is to give consumers buying retail boxed processors the illusion that they're paying a comparable price to OEMs.

 

[jpiniero]

I would have hoped this was common knowledge by now, but apparently it isn't. The prices listed on ark.intel.com only serve two purposes. One is to grant those consumers who are buying a pre-built computer and paying for a processor upgrade the illusion that the OEM is charging a reasonable price for such. The other is to give consumers buying retail boxed processors the illusion that they're paying a comparable price to OEMs.

This is true, but the price is still far too much for Apple or any of the Android device makers to even possibly consider, and thus has little shot of changing things.

 

[pw257008]

what's the difference between the 5y10 and the 5y10a?

 

[Khato]

This is true, but the price is still far too much for Apple or any of the Android device makers to even possibly consider, and thus has little shot of changing things.

I'd disagree that it's beyond Apple's consideration assuming that they actually had a need for the performance. After all, by Android standards every single tablet that Apple sells is already in the premium category. If they had a use for the higher performance of a Core-M based tablet it's a pretty safe bet that they could get consumers to pay the necessary $100-$200 premium.

As for Android tablets, yeah, no question there considering that Merrifield is already saturating all the Android performance requirements that I'm aware of... and it does so at quite reasonable prices.

What will be interesting to watch is what doors Core-M might open with respect to windows tablets/2in1. Especially with Baytrail (and Microsoft's relenting on license fees) resulting in windows finally having the ability to play in the low end of that market. While I have no expectations of some massive reversal of tablet marketshare and a downfall of Android, well, making windows competitive in that space unquestionably has potential. Potential which comes back to the Core-M device (or traditional laptop/desktop) because there is a lot to be said for having all your devices use the same OS.

 

[Khato]

what's the difference between the 5y10 and the 5y10a?

One of the slides states that the 5y10 supports a 4W config down TDP.

 

[witeken]

This is true, but the price is still far too much for Apple or any of the Android device makers to even possibly consider, and thus has little shot of changing things.

From Ark:

Recommended Customer Price (RCP) is pricing guidance only for Intel products. Prices are for direct Intel customers, typically represent 1,000-unit purchase quantities, and are subject to change without notice. Prices may vary for other package types and shipment quantities. Listing of RCP does not constitute a formal pricing offer from Intel.

 

[jpiniero]

I'd disagree that it's beyond Apple's consideration assuming that they actually had a need for the performance. After all, by Android standards every single tablet that Apple sells is already in the premium category. If they had a use for the higher performance of a Core-M based tablet it's a pretty safe bet that they could get consumers to pay the necessary $100-$200 premium.

The iPad is already suffering quite a bit because of how expensive it is compared to Android tablets; I don't think Apple has any room to send pricing any higher at this point. The iPhone is a different story, possibly because of the subsidy, and they are asking for an additional $100 or so for the iPhone 6's 5.5 inch model.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Wow, the GPU is roughly twice as big as the iCPU!

 

[witeken]

The iPad is already suffering quite a bit because of how expensive it is compared to Android tablets; I don't think Apple has any room to send pricing any higher at this point. The iPhone is a different story, possibly because of the subsidy, and they are asking for an additional $100 or so for the iPhone 6's 5.5 inch model.

That's why it would be called iPad Pro, not iPad Cheap-and-slow.

 

[witeken]

Wow, the GPU is roughly twice as big as the iCPU!

Only twice as big. Kepler is 16X as big as one A15.

 

[jpiniero]

That's why it would be called iPad Pro, not iPad Cheap-and-slow.

There was talk about Apple doing a 12" iPad Pro; but I imagine if they were going to splurge on anything, it'd be the screen and GPU, in that order. Do they have 4K 12" screens yet?

IIRC Intel is doing 2+1 Broadwell Pentiums and Celerons; but I think it was U models only. So that would draw too much for a fanless tablet.

 

[Roland00Address]

That die size *fans myself* so how big is 14nm atom going to be? A rough die shrink would be about 50mm^2 but they are also improving the GPU, just imagine the power we can now put in a 7mm * 7mm, broadwell in a 9mm*9mm and the broadwell soc in a 11x12mm package

(Yes Intel is prefer rectangles for rectangles means you can do more io due to having a larger perimeter)

 

[Arachnotronic]

New Intel slogan: Failure inside.

Another stupid pricing decision. Another dead-on-arrival product. Another wasted generation.
Intel are pricing for a segment that does not exist and has no reason to exist. Benchmarks aside, there is no reason for consumers to buy an expensive Broadwell-Y based device when far cheaper ARM solutions do 'good enough' job for them.

Unfortunately Intel are so blinded by their need to protect profit margins that they constantly cripple Atom, and are now trying to shove expensive core based CPUs down ODM's throat. Not going to happen.

The market for premium tablets has been reduced to two players (effectively): Apple with their idevice and whichever Samsung Galaxy Tablet is their halo product for this quarter. The rest of the market is in a free fall towards lowest cost CPUs and SoCs.

Apple have no reason to buy anything from Intel when their in-house investment in ARM is working out so well. And one Samsung tablet alone will not have the sales volume to justify the cost to R&D for products like Broadwell-Y.

Windows based devices are also a non-starter: they simply do not bring anything new and beneficial to the table for consumers. Few years ago, the ability to use "x86" software on your tablet might have been a talking point, but now there is no shortage of native software for ARM and no need for consumers to go looking elsewhere.

Intel need to quit crippling Atom and unleash it at <$50. That is the only way they can hope to gain any traction in the tablet and smartgadget segment. Products like Core-M look very nice in presentation slides but one quick look at ebay and retail stores tells you consumers have no interest in such overpriced devices.

Unlike desktop -where Intel have an effective monopoly- in the tablet segment you cannot force consumers to buy overpriced solutions. When will Intel learn this simple lesson. The more time they waste with such mispriced products the more time they give to their ARM rivals to become stronger.

As Khato pointed out, the Intel "official" price isn't even close to what OEMs pay.

Next, Core M is intended for fanless 2-in-1 machines + fanless clamshells + premium tablets. I agree that in "premium tablets" this chip is probably going nowhere fast, but for a fanless clamshell? It's a solid offering.