Slashdot Mirror
Intel Launches Onslaught of Skylake CPUs For Laptops, Hybrids and Compute Stick
MojoKid writes: Intel is following up on its Skylake launch bonanza by opening the floodgates on at least two dozen SKUs mostly covering the mobile sector. The company is divvying up the range into four distinct series. There's the Y-Series, which is dedicated to 2-in-1 convertibles, tablets, and Intel's new Compute Stick venture. Then there's the U-Series, which is aimed at thin and light notebooks and "portable" all-in-one machines. The H-Series is built for gaming notebooks and mobile workstations, while the S-Series is designated for desktops, all-in-one machines, and mini PCs. Also, the Y-Series that was previously known as simply the Core M, (the chip found in products like the 12-inch Apple MacBook and Asus Transformer Book Chi T300) is now expanding into a whole family of processors. There will be Core m3, Core m5, and Core m7 processors, similar to Intel's Core i3, Core i5, and Core i7 CPU models in other desktop and notebook chips.
The number of distinct microprocessor SKUs on the market doubles every 18 months.
Yes and no. Yes, they can. No, not in the way you want them to.
Alpine Ridge only supports DisplayPort 1.2, which does not have enough bandwidth to drive 5K (you need DP 1.3). So instead Intel has it carry 2 complete connections (8 lanes).
On paper that's enough bandwidth, but now you have to build a 5K display that uses multi-stream tiling to bond 2 interfaces. MST is kind of an ugly hack, and while Apple uses it on the 5K iMac since it's a closed system, it would be a bigger can of worms to use it on an external display given their demand for perfection.
so what you're saying is that intel loses in every other metric except being faster? ok I might be able to see why people are sticking with x86 besides program compatibility.
besides, I certainly hope that you're not trying to suggest that octacore arm is faster than an intel octacore when all cores are running calculation...
arm loses on everything except watts, for certain things, and price. but even a chip for a cheap laptop would beat an arm chip priced for a laptop.
I got a quad core 2.7ghz phone(and it's not a cheap phone! I could buy a decent laptop for the price) and my aging intel 2.5ghz laptop still beats it night and day, on a common web bench the slower by mhz intel being 2-8 times better than the arm chip..
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
arm loses on everything except watts, for certain things, and price. but even a chip for a cheap laptop would beat an arm chip priced for a laptop.
That was certainly something that came as a surprise to us about... oh, I think it was two years ago, just how underpowered ARM chips are compared to what look like similarly-specced x86 ones. We were looking at moving to at least some ARM-based server stuff for power and cost reasons, but quickly found that they don't come close to the performance of x86 hardware (that was after spending forever on tuning and optimisation, we assumed we'd set things up wrong but it turned out that they just don't make for good server devices).
I'm not trying to bash ARM here, just pointing out that if I want to build a versatile tablet or embedded device I wouldn't think of anything other than ARM, but for a server I wouldn't think of anything other than x86 (or equivalent, Sparc, Power, whatever). They're just designed for totally different market segments.
'xactly there's a reasons why OEMs don't go and make ARM laptops:
- their power/speed ratio isn't what adverts claim compared to intel, nothing beat intel on on speed right now. nothing.
- apps that run on x86 dont run on armv8, you need to be able to recompile, reoptimize, etc. which is often not possible.
- non-xeon intel is iactually toe to toe with arm power-consumption wise.
I think most people figure that if their phone lasts 1-2 day idle, arm must be the reason for it. its not though. its the OS, the screen, the ram, etc. but mainly, the OS. both arm and intel CPUs are very integrated nowadays and can fully turn off (ie use 0 power) for various components, very fast.
On a phone, when screen is off, almost everything is powered off except for the RAM. apps data access is queued. apps wake lock (opportunity to wake up he cpu to run stuff) are queued. This is considered "idle".
On a laptop, when considered idle, screen is on and everything is running. No wake lock for apps, its always on. No queueing.
Yet under these conditions intel cpus consume a tiny fraction more than arms. Doesn't take a genius to figure out that under the same conditions the arm cpu will use as much or more power, or be slower. Worse! armv8 CPUs ain't even all that cheap.
Thus as it stands, arm makes no sense for the workstation, laptop, server racks market.