# Ivy Bridge Quad-Core to Have 77W TDP, Intel Plans for LGA1155 Ivy Bridge Entry



## btarunr (Oct 18, 2011)

Intel's next generation "Ivy Bridge" Core processors slated for 2012 will mark the beginning of Intel's transition to the brand new 22 nanometer fab process. It looks like Ivy Bridge will significantly benefit from this transition, since Intel will raise the bar in terms of energy-efficiency. Even the fastest P1 (performance 1) tier quad-core chips will have TDP rated as low as 77W, down from the 95W Core i7 2600K, for example, has. 

The punters at Intel marketing have sliced the market down to finer segments, to better address it. The market is sliced in terms of price-segments (vertical), and in terms of target users (horizontal). The two markers are independent of each other, yet they complement each other in pin-pointing areas of the market Intel can address. Ivy Bridge LGA1155 is restricted to P1 (performance tier 1) segment on the top, with higher tiers, along with HEDT (high-end desktop) being reserved for Sandy Bridge-E LGA2011, and future "Ivy Bridge-E". Horizontally, Intel will have "K" quad-core parts for Enthusiast, standard (locked) quad-core vPro for the Standard, "T" quad-core for Performance-optimized lifestyle, and "S" for Power-optimized lifestyle. Chaotic as it looks, the table below lays out the lineup perfectly. 






Unlocked "K" and standard (locked) vPro quad-core parts have TDP of 77W, performance-optimized "T" quad-core parts at 65W, and power-optimized "S" quad-core parts at 45W. There are dual-core Core i3 parts, too, with TDP of 55W (35W for the "S" variants). 

The P1 segment parts will fall within the Core i7-3700 series, these chips will have the full 8 MB L3 cache present on the Ivy Bridge silicon, and 4 cores with 8 threads (HyperThreading enabled). Just below P1 segment are the MS2 and MS1 segments, the MS2 segment will include quad-core parts with 6 MB L3 cache, and no HyperThreading. The top-most MS2 part will have an unlocked multiplier, much like today's Core i5-2500K. MS2 and MS1 segment parts will take up Core i5-3500 series, Core i5-3400 series, and Core i5-3300 series. There will be just one class of dual-core parts, in the power-optimized MS1 segment. These segments will get have an updated feature-set over the present generation, that includes AES-NI acceleration, PP-DRNG. 





Dual-core parts will span across key low-end and value segments. The 55W dual-core silicon will form the bed for SKUs in all four horizontal segments, in T2, T1, and L3 vertical segments. T2 and T1 segment parts will carry the Core i3-3100 series SKUs. These chips will have HyperThreading technology enabled, along with AVX, and updated GPU feature-set. The L3 segment will house the cheapest Ivy Bridge processor, in the Pentium Dual-Core G2000 family. This chip will now support dual-channel DDR3-1600 MHz. 

Moving on to backwards compatibility with current Intel 6-series chipset motherboards, let me kill the suspense here. Ivy Bridge will run on Intel 6-series chipset motherboards, provided:
They use the following chipsets: Z68, P67, H67, or H61 (Q67 and Q65 are not supported);
The motherboards feature ME8L UEFI update. For this:
o Your motherboard should currently feature a UEFI firmware
o It should support ME8L update process at the physical level, where the EEPROM is sufficiently large
In due course of time, we will learn more about the ME8L EFI firmware update.





Last but not the least, Intel Smart Response technology (SRT) will be updated to be more functional, and perform even better than it does. Intel will seggregate SRT support among both processors and chipsets. So to be able to use SRT, besides having a compatible chipset, you'll also need a compatible processor. Future Q77, Z77, and H77 chipsets will support SRT, on Core i3, Core i5, and Core i7 processors. 





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## NC37 (Oct 18, 2011)

Impressed to see Intel stick with a socket this long. Keep this up and it might remove one of the reasons for me to stay in AMD builds for my main rig.


----------



## Red_Machine (Oct 18, 2011)

Why impressed?  Remember LGA 775?


----------



## qubit (Oct 18, 2011)

This sounds excellent, I can't wait to get one of these.


----------



## dieterd (Oct 18, 2011)

my concern is about - why Intels is not slowing down if AMD just now did a stop? I mean why you keep running if your only concurrent just failed and stopped for a while (without no realistic plans to restart moving his lame ass)? 
Is the new Intel products coplete rubish, but those would shine any way vs the "mighty" Buldozzer? 
Or there will be monopoly like pricing?


----------



## damric (Oct 18, 2011)

lol, BD stole all of your TDPs.


----------



## erixx (Oct 18, 2011)

great news, ... so I will be able to upgrade in the future to something MAXIMUM IMPRESSIVE : )  (P67)


----------



## arnoo1 (Oct 18, 2011)

And 6-core ivy bridge cpu's??


----------



## Benetanegia (Oct 18, 2011)

dieterd said:


> my concern is about - why Intels is not slowing down if AMD just now did a stop? I mean why you keep running if your only concurrent just failed and stopped for a while (without no realistic plans to restart moving his lame ass)?
> Is the new Intel products coplete rubish, but those would shine any way vs the "mighty" Buldozzer?
> Or there will be monopoly like pricing?



I guess that they have to at least compete with themselves if they want to sell something and for that they probably need to soundly beat their previous CPUs. Bear in mind how long it's been since first Quad cores were released, and those are enough for most people. Even Core i7 is been here long enough. Enthusiasts will upgrade for a little improvement but the mayority of people will not upgrade unless there's a significant advancement*, and the market is pretty much saturated. Intel has already seen that the market is slowing down, not all quarters have been as good as they thought despite not having a real competitor, so they need to keep moving or simply see their market shrink and eventually die of starvation (Intel is big company that needs high revenues in order to survive).

* I know many people that only do office work, that still use single cores like P4, Athlon XP and heck I still have a 486 that works (if only was useful). Obviously those are not usable by todays standards, or not desirable (P4/Athlon XP), but a quad core CPU will always be enough for "home use" unless tasks like web surfing and office are deliberately made a lot harder to run, wich would stink even to illitertes IMO. So people would hold on to those for as long as the hardware lived or until there's a new CPU that brings a massive performance advantage for very little price. Intel can't just afford to sell you 1 CPU every 10 years, they need you tu buy their CPUs every 3-4 years minimum.


----------



## AsRock (Oct 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> This sounds excellent, I can't wait to get one of these.



me too, going be hard waiting for 2013 which is were i am hoping my system will last.  But will have to see how SkyRim runs on my current system 1st.


----------



## shb- (Oct 18, 2011)

NC37 said:


> Impressed to see Intel stick with a socket this long. Keep this up and it might remove one of the reasons for me to stay in AMD builds for my main rig.



"This long"? Even year is not passed if i am correct. And ivy is a die shrink, it would be total BS if intel would require new socket for such. Gulftown (westmare) was a die shrink of bloomfield (nahalem), used same socket, so nothing new here. Be excited if intel sticks to one socket more than one "tick-tock"  , like with lga775.


----------



## Zubasa (Oct 18, 2011)

shb- said:


> "This long"? Even year is not passed if i am correct. And ivy is a die shrink, it would be total BS if intel would require new socket for such. Gulftown (westmare) was a die shrink of bloomfield (nahalem), used same socket, so nothing new here. Be excited if intel sticks to one socket more than one "tick-tock"  , like with lga775.


Even LGA 775 have half-a-million revisions.... :shadedshu


----------



## naoan (Oct 18, 2011)

This is what I expect from future CPU, faster and more power efficient, not the opposite.


----------



## Jegergrim (Oct 18, 2011)

How do we know if our motherboards support
 " The motherboards feature ME8L UEFI update. For this:
o Your motherboard support currently feature a UEFI firmware
o It should support ME8L update process at the physical level, where the EEPROM is sufficiently large" ?

Will be buying the MSI Z68A-65GD G3


----------



## Dent1 (Oct 18, 2011)

dieterd said:


> my concern is about - why Intels is not slowing down if AMD just now did a stop? I mean why you keep running if your only concurrent just failed and stopped for a while



Do you honestly think Intel care what AMD are doing? Intel are going to release 77W TDP Ivy Bridge Quad-Core regardless of what AMD bring out.


----------



## LiveOrDie (Oct 18, 2011)

Woooooooooo INTEL FTW AMD FTF


----------



## Spaceman Spiff (Oct 18, 2011)

Red_Machine said:


> Why impressed?  Remember LGA 775?



Remember?? 

Still rockin it!!  I may upgrade eventually, but haven't had a real need to quite yet.


----------



## 1c3d0g (Oct 18, 2011)

Dent1 said:


> Do you honestly think Intel care what AMD are doing? Intel are going to release 77W TDP Ivy Bridge Quad-Core regardless of what AMD bring out.



Yup, and that's just the beginning. Remember, this is Intel's first try at mass-production of their exciting new 3D transistor technology. With Haswell, Intel will have optimized their CPU architecture even more for this new process, so we're going to see some very interesting products from them in the near future.


----------



## MikeMurphy (Oct 18, 2011)

Intel's threat isn't AMD.

Intel's threat is ARM, and they need to move fast on die shrinks and aggressive power saving to meet this threat.  It's coming.


----------



## blibba (Oct 18, 2011)

AsRock said:


> me too, going be hard waiting for 2013 which is were i am hoping my system will last.  But will have to see how SkyRim runs on my current system 1st.



I'm also waiting at least until 2013. Your system will piss all over Skyrim unless you expect super-high resolutions and maximum settings.


----------



## btarunr (Oct 18, 2011)

MikeMurphy said:


> Intel's threat isn't AMD.
> 
> Intel's threat is ARM, and they need to move fast on die shrinks and aggressive power saving to meet this threat.  It's coming.



Intel's threat is Intel, and consumers getting "set" for more than a couple of years with an Intel processor.

Intel and ARM vendors target entirely different markets. It's like comparing a sportscar company to a sportsbike company.


----------



## MikeMurphy (Oct 18, 2011)

btarunr said:


> Intel's threat is Intel, and consumers getting "set" for more than a couple of years with an Intel processor.
> 
> Intel and ARM vendors target entirely different markets. It's like comparing a sportscar company to a sportsbike company.



I respect your opinions but surely you must realize that smartphones are taking on more and more tasks which traditionally were the exclusive jurisdiction of PCs.  

And, the trend is continuing at increased pace.  Not only do we have more capable smartphones, but those same chips are running tablets, which traditionally were x86 territory.

You really think the spheres are separate?  And will continue to remain totally separate?

They most definitely are not.


----------



## btarunr (Oct 18, 2011)

MikeMurphy said:


> I respect your opinions but surely you must realize that smartphones are taking on more and more tasks which traditionally were the exclusive jurisdiction of PCs.
> 
> And, the trend is continuing at increased pace.  Not only do we have more capable smartphones, but those same chips are running tablets, which traditionally were x86 territory.
> 
> ...



Sure, both a car and a motorcycle can take you places, it's just that each is fundamentally incapable of certain tasks the other is capable of, and neither can replace the other.

That's not to say that ARM and x86 will never cross paths. Intel is struggling to miniaturize x86 to maintain performance per watt levels comparable to ARM, while ARM designers like NVIDIA dream of one day kicking out x86 processor from the PC.


----------



## Grings (Oct 18, 2011)

I remember 775, i also remember having to buy a new mobo everytime i upgraded to a newer chip, regardless of it having the same socket.
I recently got an ASRock z68 extreme4 gen3, but i bet despite it supporting Pci-e 3 theres still some reason we'll all need a new mobo when Ivy Bridge releases.


----------



## btarunr (Oct 18, 2011)

Anyone who bought Gigabyte G1.Sniper2 must be feeling terrible. Sure, that board gives you the perception of Ivy Bridge-readiness with its PCIe Gen 3.0 slots; but then the board uses ye olde AwardBIOS. No UEFI = no scope for firmware update to support Ivy Bridge.


----------



## kid41212003 (Oct 18, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> I guess that they have to at least compete with themselves if they want to sell something and for that they probably need to soundly beat their previous CPUs. Bear in mind how long it's been since first Quad cores were released, and those are enough for most people. Even Core i7 is been here long enough. Enthusiasts will upgrade for a little improvement but the mayority of people will not upgrade unless there's a significant advancement*, and the market is pretty much saturated. Intel has already seen that the market is slowing down, not all quarters have been as good as they thought despite not having a real competitor, so they need to keep moving or simply see their market shrink and eventually die of starvation (Intel is big company that needs high revenues in order to survive).
> 
> * I know many people that only do office work, that still use single cores like P4, Athlon XP and heck I still have a 486 that works (if only was useful). Obviously those are not usable by todays standards, or not desirable (P4/Athlon XP), but a quad core CPU will always be enough for "home use" unless tasks like web surfing and office are deliberately made a lot harder to run, wich would stink even to illitertes IMO. So people would hold on to those for as long as the hardware lived or until there's a new CPU that brings a massive performance advantage for very little price. Intel can't just afford to sell you 1 CPU every 10 years, they need you tu buy their CPUs every 3-4 years minimum.



Excellent points.


----------



## blibba (Oct 18, 2011)

Grings said:


> I remember 775, i also remember having to buy a new mobo everytime i upgraded to a newer chip, regardless of it having the same socket.
> I recently got an ASRock z68 extreme4 gen3, but i bet despite it supporting Pci-e 3 theres still some reason we'll all need a new mobo when Ivy Bridge releases.



You got unlucky. I used the same motherboard for Cedar Mill, Conroe and Wolfdale and never felt that I was missing out on anything. I can't actually think of a 775 chipset that couldn't support Wolfdale through bios flashing. Nforce 5 maybe?


----------



## MikeMurphy (Oct 18, 2011)

btarunr said:


> Sure, both a car and a motorcycle can take you places, it's just that each is fundamentally incapable of certain tasks the other is capable of, and neither can replace the other.
> 
> That's not to say that ARM and x86 will never cross paths. Intel is struggling to miniaturize x86 to maintain performance per watt levels comparable to ARM, while ARM designers like NVIDIA dream of one day kicking out x86 processor from the PC.



Can't you see all the things that have literally migrated over to ARM platforms?  See the incredible evolution since the iPhone was released?  

I don't need x86 to do any of these things anymore.

-Email
-Websurfing
-Games (think Angrybirds which is now much more popular on ARM than PC)
-Videoconfrencing via skype
-Productivity software (is still in its infancy)

Hell, if I could walk up to a keyboard and monitor and wirelessly sync my phone with them I don't think I would need a PC (once MS gets their ass in gear and makes a proper ARM port of Office).  The _only _problem right now with smartphones and tablets is the interface is sometimes not as good as the PC counterparts especially for productivity tasks.  Optional sync solves this completely.

Sure some tasks require serious horsepower, but not many and rarely does the average person need it.  Also, cloud processing will lend a helping hand in this respect when the time comes.  This is the heavy lifting that Intel will be doing.

Anyways, its crystal clear to me.  I'm surprised others don't see it.


----------



## Grings (Oct 18, 2011)

blibba said:


> You got unlucky. I used the same motherboard for Cedar Mill, Conroe and Wolfdale and never felt that I was missing out on anything. I can't actually think of a 775 chipset that couldn't support Wolfdale through bios flashing. Nforce 5 maybe?



I had Nforce 6 which couldn't overclock 65nm quads or any 45nm chips for shit, and an old 975 board that didn't like either.
I also got a p45 to replace the p35 i had for pci-e 2, admittedly that one wasn't necessary


----------



## MikeMurphy (Oct 18, 2011)

^ Even Microsoft is now into the ARM game.

Windows 8 will run on ARM.

Honestly, what part of this isn't a direct, immediate _and_ future threat to Intel and x86?


----------



## Thefumigator (Oct 18, 2011)

MikeMurphy said:


> Intel's threat isn't AMD.
> 
> Intel's threat is ARM, and they need to move fast on die shrinks and aggressive power saving to meet this threat.  It's coming.



Intel's thread is also Vision. Where AMD is doing relatively well.


----------



## repman244 (Oct 18, 2011)

Red_Machine said:


> Why impressed?  Remember LGA 775?



Yep I remember, my Pentium 4 board (socket 775) wasn't compatible with a Pentium D and a Pentium D board wasn't compatible with Core 2 Duo. They were changing the chipset instead of the socket.

But anyway, Ivy looks really good I think we could expect an 8 core desktop part as well...


----------



## shb- (Oct 18, 2011)

When ARM finally will meet requirements of a modern workstation (execute complex javascript powered webpages/webapps; run games; encode/edit videos etc; able to run VMs/virtualize) it will be just as heavy/"power inefficient" as x86. And everybody will choose x86 because of tons of legacy software supported.


----------



## Grings (Oct 18, 2011)

MikeMurphy said:


> Can't you see all the things that have literally migrated over to ARM platforms?  See the incredible evolution since the iPhone was released?
> 
> I don't need x86 to do any of these things anymore.
> 
> ...



None of them things have 'literally migrated' to mobile devices at all, sure they can do them, but every single one is substandard compared to doing them on a pc or mac


----------



## 3volvedcombat (Oct 18, 2011)

shb- said:


> When ARM finally will meet requirements of a modern workstation (execute complex javascript powered webpages/webapps; run games; encode/edit videos etc; able to run VMs/virtualize) it will be just as heavy/"power inefficient" as x86. And everybody will choose x86 because of tons of legacy software supported.



Those ARM Processors are doubling in cores with pretty much the same power efficiency and increasing in Ghz.

Legacy software support can only be there for so long, if Intel and the market keep progressing for so long. The idea is, everything pretty much get's to old, and sometimes it's replaced with something completely different. (Take for instance, Steve Job's and everything he has changed drastically.) 

@ the rate ARM processor's are going, there going to be very fast, fast enough to run java, encode video's, and add VM's. 
What make's you think they will progress to heavy, power hogging design's where EVERYTHING in there trend is to stay small, no matter what. 

ARM processor's are going to keep there market, they have to because that's what they compete the best in, there going to grow enough where they can finally address other market's with there own version's of software and compatibility.

It's like saying, ARM's will never progress, because the only thing ARM processors are not doing right now, is everything you mentioned above. Believe it when you see ARM processors with java capability's, Vm's, Encoding, Heavy gaming. 

Because that's all they got left to start progressing towards. 

And if anything there will be ground breaking new software that will do exactly everything you said above, for ARM processor's that's all they have to look forward to. Nothing's necessarily stopping them.


----------



## btarunr (Oct 18, 2011)

Jegergrim said:


> How do we know if our motherboards support
> " The motherboards feature ME8L UEFI update. For this:
> o Your motherboard support currently feature a UEFI firmware
> o It should support ME8L update process at the physical level, where the EEPROM is sufficiently large" ?
> ...



You can find out if the board you're about to buy features UEFI by looking up reviews. As for "sufficiently large" EEPROM, We need to find out more about what's "sufficiently large", and what else goes into making a UEFI-driven motherboard capable of ME8Legacy update. One thing that's clear is that upgrading to that Ivy Bridge-compatible firmware isn't looking to be as easy as flashing your board. Boards with legacy BIOS are technically already locked out of Ivy Bridge, unless Gigabyte's BIOS engineers pull off some hack like they did with HybridEFI (which isn't actually EFI, but legacy BIOS with an address space tweak that lets it boot from large volumes).


----------



## cadaveca (Oct 18, 2011)

btarunr said:


> You can find out if the board you're about to buy features UEFI by looking up reviews. As for "sufficiently large" EEPROM, We need to find out more about what's "sufficiently large", and what else goes into making a UEFI-driven motherboard capable of ME8Legacy update. One thing that's clear is that upgrading to that Ivy Bridge-compatible firmware isn't looking to be as easy as flashing your board. Boards with legacy BIOS are technically already locked out of Ivy Bridge, unless Gigabyte's BIOS engineers pull off some hack like they did with HybridEFI (which isn't actually EFI, but legacy BIOS with an address space tweak that lets it boot from large volumes).



I'll be keeping my PCIe 3.0 samples to check out how it works, when an updated BIOS and these CPUs are released. I've made commitments to both MSi and GIgabyte to cover the issue when devices are available in the retail space.

Because most gigabyte boards support dual BIOS, I could see them flashing to backup BIOS first, and then an updated EFI firmware might be possible.

And you are right, it's nothing more than a "tweaked drive controller BIOS" currently, as "address space tweak", i do not think covers how much of a hack it really is.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 18, 2011)

MikeMurphy said:


> Can't you see all the things that have literally migrated over to ARM platforms?  See the incredible evolution since the iPhone was released?
> 
> I don't need x86 to do any of these things anymore.
> 
> ...



What makes the most money out of us consumers?  Games.  The gaming industry is huge.  No matter how powerful smartphones become, playing Fallout 5 or COD MW17 on a 3.5" screen still sucks balls.
Consoles and PC's will continue to evolve as long as the desire for immersive escapism is there.  Cloud will address some things but latency issues and down time still make it a not for fun option.
Productivity tasks again done on a small screen form are tiresome.  Sometimes you need a large 15" screen to get things done.   
Miniaturisation of form factor us all fine on dandy but it entirely depends upon the needs basis of the consumer.  

I'm with BTA on this one.  It is two different avenues that run parallel.  And please note as devices become more powerful, battery life is not progressing as much so devices still do not give the operational run time of a mains powered 10kg leviathon (or 17KG as my fat desktop is!).

No, I like my bike for zipping about but when i need to take the kids and dog to the beach, I'll use my 4x4.


----------



## 3volvedcombat (Oct 18, 2011)

the54thvoid said:


> What makes the most money out of us consumers?  Games.  The gaming industry is huge.  No matter how powerful smartphones become, playing Fallout 5 or COD MW17 on a 3.5" screen still sucks balls.
> Consoles and PC's will continue to evolve as long as the desire for immersive escapism is there.  Cloud will address some things but latency issues and down time still make it a not for fun option.
> Productivity tasks again done on a small screen form are tiresome.  Sometimes you need a large 15" screen to get things done.
> Miniaturisation of form factor us all fine on dandy but it entirely depends upon the needs basis of the consumer.
> ...



If ARM processor's get power enough to run game's like you said, what makes you think there going to play it on a 3.5inch screen.......

What's stopping those engineer's from creating an docking station, or link between wired connection to a monitor if its that fast. 

See what you guy's are forgetting is, ARM processor's have no limitation's, what's stopping it from communicating with a big monitor via any type of connection. 

There are no limitation's to ARM processor's. 

I could see in the future, devices so powerful it is literally a computer in your pocket, and if the user wanted to have more capability's he can connect that device dock/wire/wireless to a bigger panel..... 

Imagine the portable platform, when you do not need that big platform, you can remove the device and take it on the go like a psp, something so intertwined with you it compete's in multiple market's.

Nothing is stopping ARM processor's, and there continued innovation to be faster, more portable, and reliable to the consumer, its open....

**EDIT** With battery life, there are limitation's on how fast that progresses, but with all this hogging of Non-renewable resource's, were eventually going to really have to rely on batteries.
Eventually there will be enough of a movement and innovation that we will eventually master the art of saving electricity, because if we dont.
Were going to in the dark age's very very soon.


----------



## WarraWarra (Oct 18, 2011)

Good stuff Intel, finally thinking and not just spam producing mixed confusion parts.

Still would reduce this to 3 levels. (high - mid - low) and having max 3 or 4 cpu's per level.
12 cpu models vs 128 cpu models should cut down on time + money wasted and Intel running around like a headless chicken that Intel used to be.

Laptop should have max 3 or 4 cpu's in total, embedded / Atom 4x at max products.
Laptop and low power can be merged as they share same concepts except.

Would be ideal if desktop and server could be the same where server has the cherry on the cake or just extra cache or some extra featured using the same base / actual desktop cpu model.
This can then share same sockets and those with the cash can use the server cpu's in their desktops if they have the cash or high end motherboards that allow this.


----------



## shb- (Oct 18, 2011)

3volvedcombat said:


> I could see in the future, devices so powerful it is literally a computer in your pocket, and if the user wanted to have more capability's he can connect that device dock/wire/wireless to a bigger panel.....



This will happen, but i doubt it will be anytime soon. Have a look at desktop PC processors/mobos/vgas - size haven't changed at all in last 15 years. Those components mybe even got beefier - customers demand more and more power and chipmakers cant just shrink their chips - they have to shrink them AND double/tripple the transistor count  . Something really crazy must happen, if we want sizes to go down on mainstream PCs/consoles/laptops - worldwide cloud adaption, some new crazy tech that goes beyon 1nm (NOW!) etc.


----------



## Red_Machine (Oct 18, 2011)

A computer in your pocket in the future?  That's the way it's always been.  My smartphone is about as powerful as a 10 year old PC.


----------



## Shihab (Oct 18, 2011)

I doubt smartphones and tablets will pwn the PC. Aside from the many hardware limitations, the OSs and frameworks running them just can't stand to those of the PC. Sure you can pop a few green pigs on your iPhone, but ever thought on what was this game programmed ? Yep, on a PC !



the54thvoid said:


> What makes the most money out of us consumers?  Games.  The gaming industry is huge.  No matter how powerful smartphones become, playing Fallout 5 or COD MW17 on a 3.5" screen still sucks balls.



 I see what you did there


----------



## Delta6326 (Oct 18, 2011)

Office computer is still running Socket 478 Pentium 4 2.66Ghz Northwood (130 nm)! Still runs great on XP. and my gaming comp. LGA 775 Q6600 is still rocking! But I might upgrade to Ivy Bridge and turn my current comp. into my office comp.


----------



## HalfAHertz (Oct 18, 2011)

My guess is that the TDP is 7w for the GPU part and 70w for the CPU part.


----------



## cheesy999 (Oct 18, 2011)

HalfAHertz said:


> My guess is that the TDP is 7w for the GPU part and 70w for the CPU part.



you're forgetting the GPU has always been 1 process behind on Intel CPUs, it may very well be the tradditional 65W CPU with a 12W GPU


----------



## Static~Charge (Oct 18, 2011)

3volvedcombat said:


> If ARM processor's get power enough to run game's like you said, what makes you think there going to play it on a 3.5inch screen.......



Why, is that a 17" TouchPad I see sticking out of your pocket?  

ARM processors still have a long way to go before they can compete with the likes of even a low-end Sandy Bridge processor.


----------



## Benetanegia (Oct 18, 2011)

the54thvoid said:


> What makes the most money out of us consumers?  Games.  The gaming industry is huge.



That's not true at all. If it was true Intel wouldn't have 60% of GPU shipments. And half (or more) of the remaining market share wouldn't be integrated graphics from both AMD and Nvidia. And the remaining wouldn't be primarily dominated by low end GPUs not suitable for gaming.

Laptops and nettops wouldn't outsell desktops, etc.

If ARM can grab the entire non-gaming, non-enthusiast, non-workstation market Intel could still easily loose 80% of their consumer market. Sure that's not going to happen anytime soon, but even a 15% loss would completely change the landscape and would make them have to cut some corners in the company. Add the fact that they also compete with their own previous generations* and Intel could be facing some real challenges in the near future.

* Like I said any Quad from the past 4 years is enough for 95% of the people. Also most people expect their PCs to last more than 5 years. These people who are buying PCs right now will not be willing to buy anything for the next 5-8 years, because they trully don't need it. If by 2015 ARM can put out octo+ cores, that are out of order and can reach 4 Ghz, that will be a good enough upgrade for them. Cortex A-15 is already OoO superscalar and is expected to come in at 2.5 Ghz. So what I said above is more than doable, hence it would all become a matter of price, wattage etc. and there ARM is a much better contender. Not that Intel could not contend in that situation, but it would need to become a much more "slim" company in order to be able to be sustained selling $10-$50 chips intead of current ones.


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Oct 18, 2011)

If this is true that's pretty dammed amazing.


----------



## HalfAHertz (Oct 18, 2011)

cheesy999 said:


> you're forgetting the GPU has always been 1 process behind on Intel CPUs, it may very well be the tradditional 65W CPU with a 12W GPU



Yeah that makes more sense, plus they are supposed to buff up the GPU from 12 to 16 EUs


----------



## Delta6326 (Oct 18, 2011)

sure wish you could get these with out the IGP save watts and money!


----------



## Jstn7477 (Oct 18, 2011)

btarunr said:


> Anyone who bought Gigabyte G1.Sniper2 must be feeling terrible. Sure, that board gives you the perception of Ivy Bridge-readiness with its PCIe Gen 3.0 slots; but then the board uses ye olde AwardBIOS. No UEFI = no scope for firmware update to support Ivy Bridge.



I personally avoided Gigabyte this time when picking out the stuff for my SB build that I just ordered today. They seem to be the only one clinging on to legacy BIOS, and I don't want some crappy BIOS with tons of hacks just to make it comparable to UEFI when I could buy a $99 ASRock board with real UEFI. My AMD E-350 board is stuck with BIOS and has the dumb 3TB hack you mentioned.

Gigabyte has lost my trust with their inability to embrace UEFI, dying $150 Z68 boards and tricky marketing (which they always get busted for something concerning PCIe lane counts or Gen3 compatibility). I think my GA-E350N-USB3 is the last board I will use from them.


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Oct 18, 2011)

Delta6326 said:


> sure wish you could get these with out the IGP save watts and money!



That would be nice.


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Oct 18, 2011)

These lower TDP will sell very well. Many companies now have Environmental Policies, incl. ISO 14001 http://www.quality.co.uk/iso14000.htm and carbon offset payments, and emissions targets.  TDP really is becoming a "decision factor" in corporate and enterprise spend whereas with s775 this wasnt even on the radar yet.

Even though companies will have quite adequate existing PCs, their environmental policies will get them to invest in 22nm CPUs.  Intel needs to match equally sparsam chipsets and not do "An Atom" on their chipset.

I think in the next 18 months we will see hybrid mobile/desktop systems. Basically a corpoate desktop running on a mobile ULV platform


----------



## 3volvedcombat (Oct 18, 2011)

Static~Charge said:


> Why, is that a 17" TouchPad I see sticking out of your pocket?
> 
> ARM processors still have a long way to go before they can compete with the likes of even a low-end Sandy Bridge processor.



You did not read my post.

of course its going to be a 3.5inch screen.

Its called inter-connectivity to other devices such as LCD's and panels(17-30" lcd/ledhdtv ect..) in the future and its very possible, huge market is available if its utilized. 

Nice try though 

**EDIT**As in, PSP size and portability on the go.
When @ home or work you dock it, connect it, sync it to a large monitor. ARM processors are progressing at great speed. The reason being, is that every single company that is in the market using ARM processor's are STRIVING to beat the competition in all ways, especially with smart phone's, tablets, and PDA's. 
EXAMPLE: 
Samsung with there NEXUS phones.
Apple with there Iphone's.   There already dual core, and perform a lot of task reasonably well.

Add in the rest of the market and its a competition fiesta !!


Its like having 4-6 different Intel's and AMD's striving to beat one another in speed, usability, and diversity when it comes to hardware. Where there's competition there is ALWAYS improvement.


----------



## xBruce88x (Oct 18, 2011)

3volvedcombat said:


> If ARM processor's get power enough to run game's like you said, what makes you think there going to play it on a 3.5inch screen.......
> 
> *What's stopping those engineer's from creating an docking station, or link between wired connection to a monitor if its that fast. *



its already been done with the Atrix 4G... http://www.motorola.com/Consumers/U...ries/Docking-Stations/Atrix-Laptop-Dock-US-EN I admit the webtop app is a bit slow and limited but with arm cores at 1.5ghz and up to 4 of them that should solve the problem as far as speed goes. (atrix has a dual core 1ghz) i have the phone and its nice, don't have the dock yet as i though it a bit slow... i think its a limit of the app honestly. there is a dock that can use a monitor and keyboard rather than the lapdock thing as well.

I'm hoping this will drop the price of the 2500k/2600k when the cpu's come out in early 2012 since that will probably be my next upgrade along with a 560ti.


----------



## n-ster (Oct 18, 2011)

If only X79 was released later, but come out as IB-E  I want to buy high end but NOT be already behind in technology


----------



## 3volvedcombat (Oct 18, 2011)

xBruce88x said:


> its already been done with the Atrix 4G... http://www.motorola.com/Consumers/U...ries/Docking-Stations/Atrix-Laptop-Dock-US-EN I admit the webtop app is a bit slow and limited but with arm cores at 1.5ghz and up to 4 of them that should solve the problem as far as speed goes. (atrix has a dual core 1ghz) i have the phone and its nice, don't have the dock yet as i though it a bit slow... i think its a limit of the app honestly. there is a dock that can use a monitor and keyboard rather than the lapdock thing as well.
> 
> I'm hoping this will drop the price of the 2500k/2600k when the cpu's come out in early 2012 since that will probably be my next upgrade along with a 560ti.



Thank you good sir, +1


----------



## xBruce88x (Oct 18, 2011)

that and windows 8 supporting arm. would be cool to put win8 on my atrix haha


----------



## ViperXTR (Oct 19, 2011)

guess we still need to know how large is that "large eeprom size" means, seems mine has:



> 64Mb AMI UEFI Legal BIOS with GUI support


[/QUOTE]
waiting for me8L details >_>


----------



## Neuromancer (Oct 19, 2011)

Jegergrim said:


> How do we know if our motherboards support
> " The motherboards feature ME8L UEFI update. For this:
> o Your motherboard support currently feature a UEFI firmware
> o It should support ME8L update process at the physical level, where the EEPROM is sufficiently large" ?
> ...



Good board


----------



## xenocide (Oct 19, 2011)

xBruce88x said:


> its already been done with the Atrix 4G... http://www.motorola.com/Consumers/U...ries/Docking-Stations/Atrix-Laptop-Dock-US-EN I admit the webtop app is a bit slow and limited but with arm cores at 1.5ghz and up to 4 of them that should solve the problem as far as speed goes. (atrix has a dual core 1ghz) i have the phone and its nice, don't have the dock yet as i though it a bit slow... i think its a limit of the app honestly. there is a dock that can use a monitor and keyboard rather than the lapdock thing as well.



You just pointed out the problem.  When they start upscaling, it becomes sluggish.  Sure, with a Quad-Core ARM chip it could be viable, but that won't be commercially viable for about 2 years.  Even then, it will only be good for basic purposes.  You won't see anyone playing any graphically intensive games on one of those, or running any advanced software.  ARM chips are impressive because the environment is so limited.  They take a handful of tasks and do them excellently.  Try and take even a Quad-Core ARM chip, and do what most people can easily do with their i5-2500k's, and it will grind to a halt.


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Oct 19, 2011)

Intel is a threat to ARM, not the other way around. Intel is taking mobile more and more seriously and they have a pretty fat manufacturing process advantage. All they need to do is decide to design mobile chips for flat out competition instead of this shit they do with Atom. Netbooks could be notably more powerful but Intel holds back the performance to keep things segregated. They run the market from top to bottom and they're very stubborn with their pricing schemes.


----------



## shb- (Oct 19, 2011)

arnoo1 said:


> And 6-core ivy bridge cpu's??


Yes, its a shame. We are sitting on quads for some time now, if i am correct, since Jan2007. Intel then released quad in performance segment for reasonable price (not just extreme) despite that there were almost none apps that could utilize 4 cores. It should do the same now. My guess is this is because lack of competition - if amd fx chips would have turned out better, there would be hexa ivy on horizon. If intel released hexa now, my guess is it would be so future proof, that it cripple its (intels) future sales.


----------



## Neuromancer (Oct 19, 2011)

arnoo1 said:


> And 6-core ivy bridge cpu's??



Socket 2011. IB-E.

Irritable Bowl Economics.

$1000+ cpus.

EDIT: Ok.. one unlocked IBE (IBS?) chip prognosticated to come in at under $600. Cant tell the difference between it and the $1000 version of the same chip though :S


----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 19, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> That's not true at all. If it was true Intel wouldn't have 60% of GPU shipments.


My understanding is that every HD2000 and HD3000 Intel GPU counts in that percentage. What percentage of 2400/2500/2500K/2600/2600K owners use the on-die graphics? 
You might also argue that gamers upgrade components and systems on a much more regular basis than non-gamers - so things aren't quite that black and white... 


Benetanegia said:


> And half (or more) of the remaining market share wouldn't be integrated graphics from both AMD and Nvidia.


While a large percentage of those would be for the budget box/OEM/office ws, many tend to be snapped up by gamers also - IGP chipset boards tend to be much cheaper than full-fat enthusiast chipsets mobo's, they also offer a suitable backup if you're between graphics upgrades, and offer a fallback position if you're graphics get fubar. 


Benetanegia said:


> And the remaining wouldn't be primarily dominated by low end GPUs not suitable for gaming.


Those "unsuitable" graphics cards still contribute to a sizeable proportion of Stream users 


Benetanegia said:


> Laptops and nettops wouldn't outsell desktops, etc.


True...but then, a sizeable percentage of people either have both (laptop + desktop) or a gaming capable laptop.

Sixteen billion dollars in PC gaming revenue might not be everyones idea of big money (forecast to reach $23bn by 2014), but it isn't chump change either. I would also certainly expect AMD's Gaming Evolved and Nvidia's TWIMTBP game dev programs to keep pushing system requirements higher to keep GPU sales ticking over (another $13.8bn to add into the equation)



Benetanegia said:


> If ARM can grab the entire non-gaming, non-enthusiast, non-workstation market Intel could still easily loose 80% of their consumer market. Sure that's not going to happen anytime soon, but even a 15% loss would completely change the landscape and would make them have to cut some corners in the company. Add the fact that they also compete with their own previous generations* and Intel could be facing some real challenges in the near future.


Intel just released their Q3 financials...$3.5bn profit from a record $14.2bn revenue for the quarter probably says that they aren't in any immediate danger of having to subsist off ramen noodles and pizza slices.



Benetanegia said:


> * Like I said any Quad from the past 4 years is enough for 95% of the people. Also most people expect their PCs to last more than 5 years. These people who are buying PCs right now will not be willing to buy anything for the next 5-8 years, because they trully don't need it.


Three thoughts on that one...
1.Yup, That's why Dell and HP still sell.
2. AMD are well and truly f%<$@! in that case 
3. Pro markets (server/ws/hpc) and diversification 


Benetanegia said:


> If by 2015 ARM can put out octo+ cores, that are out of order and can reach 4 Ghz, that will be a good enough upgrade for them. Cortex A-15 is already OoO superscalar and is expected to come in at 2.5 Ghz. So what I said above is more than doable, hence it would all become a matter of price, wattage etc. and there ARM is a much better contender. Not that Intel could not contend in that situation, but it would need to become a much more "slim" company in order to be able to be sustained selling $10-$50 chips intead of current ones.


Cool...might come about if if you think ARM can oust x86 in any reasonable timeframe. That's one helluva '"if".



			
				Neuromancer said:
			
		

> Socket 2011. IB-E.



Socket 2011 = SB-E (Sandy Bridge-E) not IB-E at this stage.
Pricing supposedly starts at $294* (quad BCLK OC only) then <$600 (hex unlocked), $1k (extreme). Same pricing as Intel usually adopt for enthusiast chips (see Core i7 920, 940/950, 965XE/975XE for X58 for example)
* http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2011/2011081501_Intel_Sandy_Bridge-E_processors_priced.html


----------



## n-ster (Oct 19, 2011)

Neuromancer said:


> Socket 2011. IB-E.
> 
> Irritable Bowl Economics.
> 
> ...



Faster clock speed, Xtreme vs only "unlocked", more Cache (15M I think). The 1000$ one is to replace the 1000$ 990X, the 600$ one is to replace the i7 970/980X. I believe it may go lower, to 550$ or something, only time will tell


----------



## Benetanegia (Oct 19, 2011)

HumanSmoke said:


> My understanding is that every HD2000 and HD3000 Intel GPU counts in that percentage. What percentage of 2400/2500/2500K/2600/2600K owners use the on-die graphics?
> You might also argue that gamers upgrade components and systems on a much more regular basis than non-gamers - so things aren't quite that black and white...
> 
> While a large percentage of those would be for the budget box/OEM/office ws, many tend to be snapped up by gamers also - IGP chipset boards tend to be much cheaper than full-fat enthusiast chipsets mobo's, they also offer a suitable backup if you're between graphics upgrades, and offer a fallback position if you're graphics get fubar.



I was not trying to make a point about exactly how much gaming PCs are there. I was just refuting his claim that the mayority of people are gamers which is completely false. The mayority of people use their PC for web surfing, mailing, watch videos (mainly youtube) and a small proportion of them for the occasional gaming that includes web games, Facebook games and Pop Cap games. And guess what, many people buy their Popcap games in Steam. In fact, due to new games being console ports I find myself playing those games and some old games (classics) more time than new ones too, and I have a Sandy B and GTX460... not every Steam user is playing the latest AAA game. In fact I think CS 1.6 and CSS are still the most played games. You don't need a high-end GPU for those, not even 5 year old high-end GPU.



> Those "unsuitable" graphics cards still contribute to a sizeable proportion of Stream users



Now I'm confused. Are you trying to prove my point or what? If a sizable proportion of Steam users have unsuitable graphics (won't play the latest games, that's what I meant). Isn't it logical that they do not have the latest CPU either? More than 20% of people still use single core CPUs on Steam. The point is, even amongst gamers, not everyone needs a high end CPU. Cortex A15 is going to be a lot faster than the single core CPU that 20% os Steam users are still using. You can count on that, so is or is not ARM going to be enough for them along with the mayority of people who just do websurfing?



> Sixteen billion dollars in PC gaming revenue might not be everyones idea of big money (forecast to reach $23bn by 2014), but it isn't chump change either. I would also certainly expect AMD's Gaming Evolved and Nvidia's TWIMTBP game dev programs to keep pushing system requirements higher to keep GPU sales ticking over (another $13.8bn to add into the equation)



And still it only accounts for a 20% of the market being generous.



> Intel just released their Q3 financials...$3.5bn profit from a record $14.2bn revenue for the quarter probably says that they aren't in any immediate danger of having to subsist off ramen noodles and pizza slices.



At no point did I say Intel would fall apart or disapear. But I'm pretty sure that the days of being a $3.5bn profit company are going to be gone really soon. If you don't believe that, just wait.




> Three thoughts on that one...
> 1.Yup, That's why Dell and HP still sell.
> 2. AMD are well and truly f%<$@! in that case -_ indeed but AMD is a smaller company that can arguablly adapt better. that does not mean they would do better, but while Intel can see themselves becoming a company 1/4th the size they are today, that's harder to happen to AMD. the odds of AMD perishing in the new situation are a lot bigger tho, but if they do survive they will not be as bad for them_
> 3. Pro markets (server/ws/hpc) and diversification - already being taken by hybrid solutions and of course Intel is also there with Larrabee, but the future for Intel's high end CPUs is far from being rosy imo.



Not that I like any of what I'm saying. I'm an enthusiast and want high-end PCs and AAA games built for them. But I'm just being realistic and recognizing that the grand maority of people just don't want or need anything close to what I want, and come 2015 they would rather buy a $20 device with the power of a current Fusion chip, than paying hundreds of dollars for something they don't need. And that's going to happen if not by 2015, by 2020, no matter how much we QQ about that. It remains to be seen if the high-end desktop CPU and GPU markets could survive or not anyway. The gaming market IS growing so while a niche market it can still be big enough, a profitable one, and with lots of competition too.


----------



## shb- (Oct 19, 2011)

^^
This is nice and all, but i still cant see reason why it must be arm arch inside those simple internet browsing/word processing devices. I believe amd, intel or both of them will tune their low power x86 cores (bobcat/atom/whatever) soon enough (they are not so miserable at the moment afterall). Of course arm designs are better now, they have been paying attention to this LP market way longer then intel/amd, they arch are optimized for it (created with those LP ideas in mind). I really doubt intel will give up its market share without tough fight. Time will tell.


----------



## Frick (Oct 19, 2011)

shb- said:


> ^^
> This is nice and all, but i still cant see reason why it must be arm arch inside those simple internet browsing/word processing devices. I believe amd, intel or both of them will tune their low power x86 cores (bobcat/atom/whatever) soon enough (they are not so miserable at the moment afterall).



I think it's a "must" right now as it's the only way to go for those ultra low power devices. But yeah, x86 and ARM are getting closer and closer each other and I for one would like x86 on those small things as well. Windows Everywhere, with the software, everwhere indeed..


----------



## arnoo1 (Oct 19, 2011)

shb- said:


> Yes, its a shame. We are sitting on quads for some time now, if i am correct, since Jan2007. Intel then released quad in performance segment for reasonable price (not just extreme) despite that there were almost none apps that could utilize 4 cores. It should do the same now. My guess is this is because lack of competition - if amd fx chips would have turned out better, there would be hexa ivy on horizon. If intel released hexa now, my guess is it would be so future proof, that it cripple its (intels) future sales.



oke thanks

no upgrading for me xd

there is no need for that in the first place 2600k ftw xd


----------



## Benetanegia (Oct 19, 2011)

shb- said:


> ^^
> This is nice and all, but i still cant see reason why it must be arm arch inside those simple internet browsing/word processing devices. I believe amd, intel or both of them will tune their low power x86 cores (bobcat/atom/whatever) soon enough (they are not so miserable at the moment afterall). Of course arm designs are better now, they have been paying attention to this LP market way longer then intel/amd, they arch are optimized for it (created with those LP ideas in mind). I really doubt intel will give up its market share without tough fight. Time will tell.



No one's saying it will be ARM necessarily that will dominate (although the odds are on their side as I'll explain shortly), but it's the ARM camp that will enter it first (I mean they are 100% pushing there already) and it's ARM camp that will improve it a lot faster at least in the first few years. The reason is Intel or AMD are not interested in these devices becoming more powerful. 

Think about it, every device that is powerful enough for average joe will replace one of their desktop CPUs. Even if such a device has an Intel/AMD CPU, that CPU is going to be tiny and cheap (if they want a chance to compete with ARM devices at least), so no matter how you look at it, the mayority of their market shifted from an ASP of $150 per CPU + $100 mobo, to average of $25 per SoC. The company they are today is gone either way, no way to mantain their several dozen billion revenue. So Intel is going to fight the trend, the adoption of such devices as much as they can. The reason (all this is only my opinion obviously) is this, following the example prices from above:

- If the device is powered by an Intel SoC. They lost 1 desktop consumer (-$250) for one SoC consumer (+$25), that is, they lost $225 (compared to current market) and contributed to such devices becoming better, by simply being competitive. (because if the device uses Intel is safe to assume it is better than ARM)

- If device is ARM, they lost $250, but there's not as much competition as ARM is the only one really pushing for faster chips. Yeah, there's many people producing ARM based chips, but only one designing them and moving the tech forward. Big difference compared to 2 big companies/conglomerates fighting each other in designs and production.

The logical steps for Intel are clear for the first few years. Fight back sure, by creating SoCs, but do not compete entirely, do not create the kind of killer SoC that would take the crown yes, and the market share, but at the price of demostrating that those devices are (more) powerful. Use other methods to enter the market rather than using superior tech. This means that for a few years they will bleed desktop CPU market and will not gain too much market share on portable devices, but it's better than contributing to the trend and make the shift happen overnight. More years selling the $250 solution, even losing market, is better than being king in a less profitable (per sale) market, and everybody knows (even Intel), that they would not be king either, only another name in a long list of SoC manufacturers.

Like I said that's my opinion.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Oct 19, 2011)

So, which BS TDP scale is it this time intel


----------



## Super XP (Oct 20, 2011)

For competition I can see an 8-core Ivy Bridge with HT. AMD already claimed to be the first to release an 8-Core desktop CPU. Anyhow, Ivybridge will have a hard time taking on Piledriver when released


----------



## badtaylorx (Oct 20, 2011)

my asus p8p67 ws revo just had its bios update which enables 22mn ib chips!!! also said pci-e 3.0 as well.........i was kinda happy about that


----------

