Intel Apparently Reserving 28 W Ice Lake Mobile Chips for Apple, Removes Entries from ARK

[Raevenlord]

The idea of an ARK is to preserve that which enters it; however, the legend on the basis of arks and their concept must've slipped Intel's internal memos. The company has de-listed a previously detailed Ice Lake mobile CPU from its database - the Core i7-1068G7 - which was a 28 W part available for system integrators to build machines around. That part was special, because it was - then - the only 28 W part listed for mobile Ice Lake, with the rest of the CPU lineup having configurable TDPs between 12 W and 25 W - thus having a lesser maximum theoretical performance due to reduced TDP.

In its stead, Intel has entered a new, Core i7-1068NG7 (yes, the same naming with an extra N), which places this as an Apple-exclusive CPU, according to the folks over at Notebookcheck. Besides this entry, Intel has also listed the i5-1038NG7, which also features a 28 W TDP that's higher than the other available CPUs for other system integrators. If this is true, then Intel is reserving its cream-of-the-crop CPUs for Apple. Since the California-based company wouldn't be using parts with worse thermal and power consumption figures than what's available for others, the only answer to how these products came to being is that they are binned CPUs with better than average characteristics. Intel could be doing this to keep Apple happy even as the California-based company is well on its way to eschew its dependence on x86 with a fully internally-developed ARM CPU.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[phanbuey]

Yes because apple's silent cooling is definitely the best for those parts... like that one time where they released an 8 core macbook pro that was slower than the 6 core part (and almost the same as the 4 core) due to throttling and idled at 60+C.

 

[Fouquin]

Yes because apple's silent cooling is definitely the best for those parts... like that one time where they released an 8 core macbook pro that was slower than the 6 core part (and almost the same as the 4 core) due to throttling and idled at 60+C.

A lot of that was Intel's silicon being garbo. They've consistently missed their thermal targets year over year since Coffee Lake launched, and forced vendors to pick up the slack. Apple is in the unique position of controlling the silicon bin they get, but that doesn't mean they control the quality. If Intel's volume bin can't match the samples they supply then any design work around those samples is thrown right out the window for the finished product.

Apple did fuck up the transition to the i9-9880H, not going to defend that part. But Intel has not been doing a great job with keeping things cool either, and from what I hear Ice Lake is even worse. Supposedly these "28W" chips missed their power target by over 40%, and some have been clocked in at a staggering 190W during turbo duration. Intel removing the Apple specific bin from their chart likely indicates that supply of functional chips at that level is extremely constrained.

 

[chris.london]

A lot of that was Intel's silicon being garbo.

Maybe, maybe not. According to the AT review, the 15W CPUs in the XPS 13s beat the new 28W Ice Lake Pros in Geekbench’s single and multi-core tests by a fairly significant margin. It is hard for me to come up with any other explanation for these strange results than inadequate cooling.

 

[Fouquin]

Maybe, maybe not. According to the AT review, the 15W CPUs in the XPS 13s beat the new 28W Ice Lake Pros in Geekbench’s single and multi-core tests by a fairly significant margin. It is hard for me to come up with any other explanation for these strange results than inadequate cooling.

Power restrictions. Ice Lake is being strangled by more aggressive PCPS in an attempt to keep it within the realm of reason when it comes to power usage.

 

[phanbuey]

Either way... the point was that they are adding a definitely hotter chip @ 28W, which definitely will blow past that 28W envelope, in a slightly improved MBP cooling system. It will be interesting to see if there is a repeat of last time.

 

[gamefoo21]

A lot of that was Intel's silicon being garbo. They've consistently missed their thermal targets year over year since Coffee Lake launched, and forced vendors to pick up the slack. Apple is in the unique position of controlling the silicon bin they get, but that doesn't mean they control the quality. If Intel's volume bin can't match the samples they supply then any design work around those samples is thrown right out the window for the finished product.

Apple did fuck up the transition to the i9-9880H, not going to defend that part. But Intel has not been doing a great job with keeping things cool either, and from what I hear Ice Lake is even worse. Supposedly these "28W" chips missed their power target by over 40%, and some have been clocked in at a staggering 190W during turbo duration. Intel removing the Apple specific bin from their chart likely indicates that supply of functional chips at that level is extremely constrained.

Apple has no fault for using absolute garbage cooling systems that were garbage 5 years ago and they keep stuffing hotter processors under them...

Nope, Intel's fault for not making an 8 core use less power than a 4 core part that was already getting cooked....

Oh wait what about that design that Apple uses that has the fan on the opposite side of the case from the fin stack...

Nope not Apple's fault...

 

[Fouquin]

Apple has no fault for using absolute garbage cooling systems that were garbage 5 years ago and they keep stuffing hotter processors under them...

Nope, Intel's fault for not making an 8 core use less power than a 4 core part that was already getting cooked....

I literally said I wasn't going to defend Apple's cooling implementation because they fucked it up. That does not change that Intel missed their thermal and power targets by a huge margin and it's caused problems.

Oh wait what about that design that Apple uses that has the fan on the opposite side of the case from the fin stack...

That's a weaksauce argument since it's proven that any airflow is better than no airflow. The fan still cycles fresh air through the chassis. Not even defending it, just a statement on how fluids move in an unsealed container.