Intel Intros 14th Gen Core "E" Embedded Processors with E-cores Disabled

[R0H1T]

Because it is fundamentally broken. If you don't understand side-channels, it is hard to grasp.

No what you're talking about is OoO not just SMT ~ to disable all possible side channel attacks you'd have to go back to the stone ages!

 

[AusWolf]

"PEG interface"

Is that an Intel term? I get what they're referring to, but I've never seen it used anywhere else and a quick Google search really only returns one site thwt acknowledges its existence....an Intel site.

As far as I know, PEG is short for PCI-Express Graphics. It's not an interface, but a GPU located on an interface. It's used in the BIOS when you're selecting whether to initialise dedicated or integrated graphics first when booting.

 

[mechtech]

Wouldn't one want smaller, less power hungry cores for embedded products??

 

[AusWolf]

Wouldn't one want smaller, less power hungry cores for embedded products??

Unless there's something wrong with them - hence my theory (above).

 

[Macro Device]

Wouldn't one want smaller, less power hungry cores for embedded products??

It's Intel, they do not allow common sense and basic logic on their territory.

I'd very much love pocket-size friendly CPUs of roughly i5-12400 ST and MT performance without needing to donate half my neighbours to medical science to afford that. I mean, that will be possible eventually but by then, one will need something tenfold faster to run modern games.

 

[kondamin]

Wouldn't one want smaller, less power hungry cores for embedded products??

you might not have a space, heat or power problem in certain places but a particle problem.
Lets say a wood shop with loads of automated saw machines that do need the computational power.

 

[Nater]

"PEG interface"

Is that an Intel term? I get what they're referring to, but I've never seen it used anywhere else and a quick Google search really only returns one site thwt acknowledges its existence....an Intel site.

PCI Express Graphics. They started using it when PCI Express came out to differentiate from PCI.

It's getting thrown around by marketing without a second thought these days. Even more confusing for the new guy when it comes to the BIOS option on a lot of boards when choosing PEG/PCIe/Auto for which GPU gets boot priority. (when PEG literally stands PCI Express and the very next setting is read as PCI...express.

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

As far as I know, PEG is short for PCI-Express Graphics. It's not an interface, but a GPU located on an interface. It's used in the BIOS when you're selecting whether to initialise dedicated or integrated graphics first when booting.

I'm aware of that, like I said in my original comment, my question was "does only Intel use that specific terminology of the 'PEG Interface'" because I've never seen another manufacturer use that specific term to refer to an x16 slot

PCI Express Graphics. They started using it when PCI Express came out to differentiate from PCI.

It's getting thrown around by marketing without a second thought these days. Even more confusing for the new guy when it comes to the BIOS option on a lot of boards when choosing PEG/PCIe/Auto for which GPU gets boot priority. (when PEG literally stands PCI Express and the very next setting is read as PCI...express.

Did anyone read my original comment? Where I specifically said "I KNOW WHAT THEY'RE REFERRING TO" ????? I KNOW that they're talking about the x16 PCIe slot where you would normally insert the videocard. My question is why is Intel referring to it with the specific term "PEG Interface" instead of just the normal nomenclature like "PCIe x16"? Is "PEG Interface" specifically an Intel term? Because I've never seen another manufacturer use that term when, for example, I'm looking at motherboard specs.

 

[Dr. Dro]

16 cores perchiplet? It's called Zen4c and Zen5c...AMD could have had one Zen4 chiplet and one Zen4c chiplet for a total of 24 cores...so why didn't AMD do that if you believe that path to be so "self-evident"? Why don't we have a R9 9975X with 8 Zen5 cores and 16 Zen5c cores for a total of 24 cores if that is the most logical path?

Because there still seem to be certain tradeoffs with the Zen "c" cores.

BTW PEG stands for PCI Express Graphics, nothing special Hahaha just messing with ya mate.

 

[ir_cow]

Intel is finally copying what AMD has done for years. Sell defective chips, disable the bad part and call it a new product

 

[Sunny and 75]

Intel is finally copying what AMD has done for years. Sell defective chips, disable the bad part and call it a new product

Yep, that's semiconductor business for ya.

 

[Sithaer]

E-cores, more time wasted with cores that should be called PW-cores "Power Wasting" cores just like Intels trash hyperthreading.

I don't have a single issue with E-cores with my 12600KF at stock under Win 10 nowadays and they aint exactly as weak as some ppl make them out to be. 'funny how its usually ppl who never had an experience with them in the first place..'

 

[atomsymbol]

Silicon that is disabled, but is nevertheless present on the chip and is otherwise fully functional, is a waste of natural resources and a waste of chip manufacturing capacity.

 

[Wirko]

Intel is finally copying what AMD has done for years. Sell defective chips, disable the bad part and call it a new product

A decade and a half later, Intel still can't make a three-cored chip!

 

[Lycanwolfen]

They should just drop the E cores add 4 more P core's Drop the Igpu and bang finally full on P core monster. I would buy one of those.
Still the main reason why I have a core i9 9900 KFC pure 8 core no other BS.

 

[kondamin]

Silicon that is disabled, but is nevertheless present on the chip and is otherwise fully functional, is a waste of natural resources and a waste of chip manufacturing capacity.

Nah, it's using dies that have issues and would otherwise be discarded.

Doing limited runs of chips that don't have the other parts would be the waste of resources

 

[Wirko]

They should just drop the E cores add 4 more P core's Drop the Igpu and bang finally full on P core monster. I would buy one of those.
Still the main reason why I have a core i9 9900 KFC pure 8 core no other BS.

Your KFC would have about 11.584 cores if Intel threw out the graphics part.

Silicon that is disabled, but is nevertheless present on the chip and is otherwise fully functional, is a waste of natural resources and a waste of chip manufacturing capacity.

For some consolation, Intel only half-killed the E cores. Their L3 slices remain active, that's why total L3 adds up to 36MB/33MB/24MB. Otherwise it would be 24MB/24MB/18MB, exactly like in LGA1700 Xeons.

 

[OneMoar]

just when you thought the chip industry could not come up with a more confusing naming scheme up rolls Intel to raise the bar once again (or is that lower the bar)

 

[Caring1]

Intel is finally copying what AMD has done for years. Sell defective chips, disable the bad part and call it a new product

To be fair to AMD they didn't sell broken chips as they "fixed" them prior to selling them, unlike Intel who most likely knew there was an issue and decided to sell them anyway to consumers they try to force onto new platforms every couple of years.

 

[trsttte]

I'm aware of that, like I said in my original comment, my question was "does only Intel use that specific terminology of the 'PEG Interface'" because I've never seen another manufacturer use that specific term to refer to an x16 slot

I saw AMD use it as well now with PCI 5.0 to distinguish from the other "regular" slots.

Intel is finally copying what AMD has done for years. Sell defective chips, disable the bad part and call it a new product

Pretty sure they've been doing that all along, just like AMD, it's not a new thing with Ryzen

 

[watzupken]

I feel Intel is very insensitive to the issue surrounding their Raptor Lake CPUs now by introducing new SKUs. The CPUs are unstable, which means it is not functioning properly, which may potentially impact these new SKUs. Without addressing and resolving the existing issue, are they expecting people to buy these?

 

[Minus Infinity]

I feel Intel is very insensitive to the issue surrounding their Raptor Lake CPUs now by introducing new SKUs. The CPUs are unstable, which means it is not functioning properly, which may potentially impact these new SKUs. Without addressing and resolving the existing issue, are they expecting people to buy these?

Indeed. You'd have to be literally insane to touch cRaptor Lake with a 10' pole at this stage, with Intel unable or unwilling to disclose the problem. It could actually be a manufacturing problem and there is no fix but a new stepping.

 

[Crackong]

Are these fused off silicon ? or the E-core spaces just empty ?

 

[persondb]

Are these fused off silicon ? or the E-core spaces just empty ?

It probably is fused/laser'ed off, it would be weird for Intel to do an entire new die just for this.

I would think that they are using parts with defective E cores, though I am guessing depending on the demand they could use perfectly good parts as well(if there aren't enough defective parts).

They probably have a large stock of defective parts considering that only i3s in 14th gen don't have any E-core, and it would be a huge waste to sell a part with 8 perfectly good P cores as an i3(with 4 cores disabled).

 

[iameatingjam]

Silicon that is disabled, but is nevertheless present on the chip and is otherwise fully functional, is a waste of natural resources and a waste of chip manufacturing capacity.

Is that the case though?
I'm sure there's silicon where the pcores turned out fine and the ecores... didn't. Hence... this product. That would be my guess. And the alternative would be throwing out the entire chip.