Intel Broadwell-E, Apollo Lake, and Kaby Lake Details Emerge In Leaked Roadmap

bigwophh writes: In Q4 2016, Intel will release a follow up to its Skylake processors named Kaby Lake, which will mark yet another 14nm release that's a bit odd, for a couple of reasons. The big one is the fact that this chip may not have appeared had Intel's schedule kept on track. Originally, Cannonlake was set to succeed Skylake, but Cannonlake will instead launch in 2017. That makes Kaby Lake neither a tick nor tock in Intel's release cadence. When released, Kaby Lake will add native USB 3.1 and HDCP 2.2 support. It's uncertain whether these chips will fit into current Z170-based motherboards, but considering the fact that there's also a brand-new chipset on the way, we're not too confident of it. However, the so-called Intel 200 series chipsets will be backwards-compatible with Skylake. It also appears that Intel will be releasing Apollo Lake as early as the late spring, which will replace Braswell, the lowest-powered chips Intel's lineup destined for smartphones.

Comments

Mozilla Foundation now gets money from Microsoft.

[Futurepower(R)]

Good point. Mozilla Foundation now gets most of its money from Microsoft. Microsoft pays Yahoo. Yahoo pays Mozilla Foundation to make "Yahoo search" (actually Microsoft Bing search) the default search engine in Firefox. Most people don't have the technical knowledge to know how they've been manipulated, or how to restore the default search engine to Google search.

Thunderbird and SeaMonkey Composer GUIs: Damaged, apparently deliberately. Every time you do a file save, the newer versions of both ask for a new file name, and don't suggest the last one chosen. The damage was reported several months ago, but has not been fixed.

Re:We're almost at the end with current tech

[Kjella]

The real problem is that we're mostly redistributing the watts.

4 core @ 4GHz (i7-4790K) = 91W, 4*4/91 = 0.175 GHz/W
4 core @ 3.2GHz (i7-4790S) = 65W, 4*3.2/65 = 0.197 GHz/W
4 core @ 2.2GHz (i7-4790T) = 35W, 4.*2.2/35 = 0.251 GHz/W

So from top to bottom we're seeing 40% better perf/W with perfect linear scaling. Neat, buit not exactly revolutionary when you subtract overhead. We've already got so much scale out capability that power is clearly the limiting factor:

8 core @ 4GHz (doesn't exist) = ~185W
8 core @ 3.2GHz (1680v3) = 140W
8 core @ 2.2GHz (2618Lv3) = 75W
16 core @ 4GHz (doesn't exist) = ~370W
16 core @ 3.2GHz (doesn't exist) = ~280W
16 core @ 2.2GHz (E7-8860v3) = 165W

We can't go faster or wider unless we find a way to do it more efficiently, either that or we need extremely beefy PSUs and water cooling.

Re:We're almost at the end with current tech

[Alomex]

10 years ago, Intel was hinting at a massively parallel future (80 core processor rumored in development at the time),

An Intel higher up told me a while back that they could ship them today if they wanted. The problem is that users in the field report having a hard time using more than 6 cores outside host virtualization. Since then Intel has been dedicating the extra real estate to more cache, which programs can easily take advantage of, and less to cores, which no one knows quite how to use beyond 6 to 8 cores.