Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Demonstrates 10nm Ice Lake Processor, Promises PCs Will Ship With it Later this Year (theverge.com)

Posted by msmash on from the up-next dept.

Intel announced a major rethink of its chip design back in December, just before it finally delivers 10nm chips for PCs and laptops. At CES 2019 this week, Intel is demonstrating its first Ice Lake 10nm processor that's based on its new Sunny Cove microarchitecture. From a report: Intel is building in Thunderbolt 3, Wi-Fi 6, and DL Boost (deep learning boost) into these Ice Lake chips for laptops and PCs to take advantage of. Intel is now promising that PC makers will have devices with Ice Lake processors on shelves by the end of 2019. At its CES keynote today, Intel demonstrated ODM systems from Pegatron and Wistron, and Dell even joined Intel on stage to show off an Ice Lake-powered XPS laptop that will be available later this year. Dell didn't show the device powered on, but it appeared to be a 2-in-1 device that looked similar to the XPS 13. Intel is also looking to the future, too. The chip giant is planning to use Foveros 3D chip stacking technology to build future chips, a method that allows Intel's chip designers to stack extra processing power on top of an already-assembled chip die. These "chiplets" can be stacked atop one another to form a processor that includes graphics, AI processing, and more.

42 of 80 comments (clear)

  1. Still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Come back when your crap a actually works.

    1. Re:Still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown? by jellomizer · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Here is the big question. Your current chips probably are vulnerable to the problem. If you are holding off until they fix the problem, you will still be volnernable, and running a slower, outdated, and perhaps non-upgradable computer.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown? by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is a low quality shill attempt, even for Intel.

    3. Re:Still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown? by Pax681 · · Score: 1

      Why give them money when they won't fix it? Any chip currently vulnerable was purchased before I knew the product was defective. I'm not going to give intel money for defective chips knowingly.

      Think of it this way. If you have a chip slow enough that a new one would be an upgrade, why not go AMD and at least not be vulnerable to meltdown?

      AMD still have a problem with Spectre bud ;)

    4. Re:Still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Found the shill. Meltdown is trivial.

    5. Re:Still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Search for AMD based Linux laptops and tell me what you think of the selection.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    6. Re:Still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why give them money when they won't fix it? Any chip currently vulnerable was purchased before I knew the product was defective. I'm not going to give intel money for defective chips knowingly.

      Think of it this way. If you have a chip slow enough that a new one would be an upgrade, why not go AMD and at least not be vulnerable to meltdown?

      AMD still have a problem with Spectre bud ;)

      One variant, that requires local access, whereas Intel chips are vulnerable to all variants, even the remotely exploitable ones.

    7. Re:Still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Search for AMD based Linux laptops and tell me what you think of the selection.

      Acer Nitro 5 AN515-42 and Predator Helios 500 PH517-61-R0GX
      Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC
      Lenovo ThinkPad E585 and E485

      All run Linux just fine. Seems to be a pretty good selection of models ranging from your basic APU powered workhorse, mid tier dGPU gaming laptop on up to desktop replacement behemoths. All look to have IPS panels that support Freesync. Nice try Intel shill.

    8. Re:Still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Who were the vendors? The last time I searched (a couple of months ago) I decided to not buy a laptop. After reading your reply I decided to search again. So ...

      (I don't think I want to buy a Lenovo, as there have been many bad reports on their quality, admittedly the one's I'm thinking of are a few years old.) I just went to the Linux Certified site, and all their laptops were Intel, to ZAReason and all their laptops were Intel, to System76, and the laptops I was interested in were Intel (checking each laptop involved going to a sub-page, so I didn't check all of them).

      FWIW, I don't trust Amazon for anything that's sold by a third party, as I've paid for things that never showed up. (That *was* a few years ago, but I've heard nothing that indicates to me that they've changed their "we don't stand behind 3rd party orders" policy, and if I did I wouldn't start trusting them with something expensive.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    9. Re:Still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It works just fine. Having an irrelevant bug doesn't make it not work, in fact it works quite a bit faster for having it.

    10. Re:Still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      That "only annoying thing" is a deal-breaker for me, as I will not agree to the MS EULA....and also don't want to give them any money.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  2. Why would you put wifi on the CPU. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unless IntelME has some low-level Ring-0 phoning home to do.

    1. Re:Why would you put wifi on the CPU. by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Overall reduce size of your technology, and power consumption. I don't like the idea of integrated everything chips myself. But they are advantages in integrated.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Why would you put wifi on the CPU. by crow · · Score: 1

      It used to be that a bunch of standard ports were part of the chipset, USB, parallel, serial, SATA, ethernet, etc. I assume that secondary chip is now part of the CPU, so they're now saying that WiFi is on par with ethernet, which probably makes sense. For laptops, it's a no-brainer. For desktops, the added silicon is negligible, and if you don't want it, don't connect the antenna.

      I could see some security concerns with high-security applications, but they're already worried about transmissions from various wires in the system, so they're probably already running those systems in faraday cages.

    3. Re:Why would you put wifi on the CPU. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually the details are that it's much less integrated into the subsystem, it sits on the CPU level as opposed to -1 -2 -3 like IME, and it shows zero function when the machine is off, unlike IME. You know nothing about it.

    4. Re:Why would you put wifi on the CPU. by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      You know AMD has the exact same thing but called the PSP?

      Actually. we know AMD does NOT have the exact same thing.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    5. Re:Why would you put wifi on the CPU. by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      One less chip for the brand making and paying for the motherboard to worry about.
      Wake on LAN is now Wake on wifi?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    6. Re:Why would you put wifi on the CPU. by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      Think of the fun spies and police will have with wake on wifi.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    7. Re:Why would you put wifi on the CPU. by Rockoon · · Score: 2

      How would you know if they're the same or not?

      Intels has proven to be a security risk, while AMD's isnt even in a position to have the same security risks because AMD's is a hypervisor while Intels is several containment levels more privileged than a hypervisor. If your system had both, Intels would be in full control of AMD's. Its really that god damned simply.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    8. Re:Why would you put wifi on the CPU. by infolation · · Score: 1

      So the answer is a PC case that's also a faraday cage.

      You know you have security problems when even your computer needs a tinfoil hat.

    9. Re:Why would you put wifi on the CPU. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "AMD's can be disabled in the UEFI."

      Surrrrrrre it can.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  3. Really by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Dell didn't show the device powered on"

    Wow. Real impressive.

  4. 10nm? by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

    10nm eh? I'll believe it when I see it. This announcement just reeks of a desperate attempt to try and take the steam out of AMD's 12nm chips that just launched.

    1. Re:10nm? by iggymanz · · Score: 2

      don't worry, node size has just been a marketing term now for years.

      It does NOT mean half-pitch or gate length is 10nm.

      It's a term for another generation of smaller chip size than the last one. And yeah, the 10nm components on one manufactures chip could be bigger or smaller than competitors 10 nm....or 12 nm.....

      great times we live in, marketing things by buzzwords and hype instead of hard data and specs. (marketing wanks and sales choads should be lined up and summarily shot, to usher in a new age of less B.S.)

    2. Re:10nm? by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      It is not that Intel cant do 10nm, its that Intel cant do it economically. So far every 10nm part they have sold has come at a large loss, and this will probably be no different.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    3. Re:10nm? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      It's a low power chip and relatively small to work around yield issues that Intel apparently still has with 10nm. It would seem that high power chips for desktops and servers just don't work at the 100 megatransistor per square mm density that Intel originally targeted and they will need to dial that back 20-40% to make serious chips.

      IOW, the shitshow continues.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    4. Re:10nm? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      It's also that they just can't do high power chips with the original 100 mtr/mm2 10nm. Not even uneconomically. They have to rework all their cells to lower the density.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    5. Re:10nm? by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Thats an issue for another day for them. With yields so terrible it doesnt matter how great the working chips are.

      Normally things like power/heat issues are dealt with first by binning the parts. Refinement comes after large numbers of parts are made and the binning statistics that go along with it are considered.

      In the case of 10nm, Intel cant even do binning because the yields are so bad.

      What Intel needs to and will do is chiplets. Its the only way forward (only way to deal with the bad yields) and they have had 5+ years already to figure that out but didnt. They are now literally 5+ years behind AMD in future relevant cpu designs.

      Add to being behind in CPU design with also no longer having a semiconductor advantage, and that that advantage will NEVER come back because the rent-a-fabs are now bigger than Intel and will now always be so....

      I've been saying this on slashdot for 2+ years now: Sell your Intel stock and double check your 401K's and Roth's to make sure Intel isnt included in any of their index funds. Intel is fucked. Its been clear ever since they announced massive layoffs and a new "cloud strategy." Intels known that they are fucked for at least that long.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  6. I'm more interested in iGPUs by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    The new process involves "sandwiching" an iGPU core into the CPU core. In the past iGPUs were severely constrained because you wanted to keep them relatively simple to keep yields up (since if the iGPU is bad you just bricked the CPU in most cases). It should mean much, much faster integrated graphics. e.g. entry level gaming laptops in the $400-$500 range.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I'm more interested in iGPUs by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      entry level gaming laptops in the $400-$500 range.

      The AMD APUs already found that sweet spot while Intel struggled to have even a sufficient frame buffer

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    2. Re:I'm more interested in iGPUs by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      HBM adoption is slow in consumer GPUs because they are more expensive to fabricate than expected.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  7. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  8. Intel ME by jmccue · · Score: 2

    Does it still have "ME" ? If so can it be fully disabled ? If disabled can it be validated ?

    If not, "Thanks but no thanks"

    1. Re:Intel ME by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Does it still have "ME" ? If so can it be fully disabled ? If disabled can it be validated ?

      If not, "Thanks but no thanks"

      Every one has ME. Even the disabled ones still require ME.

      ME is required to boot the processor (it's not easy to boot modern complex processors with variables clocks and power sources.

      The "ME disabled" firmware simply does enough to boot the processor up and halts, so you lose functionality like dynamic voltage and frequency selection (DVFS), important for mobile processors, as well as the ability to sleep and standby the CPU. (Technically you also lose the ability to turn off the CPU, but that's easily worked around since turning off the PC works)

    2. Re:Intel ME by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If not, "Thanks but no thanks"

      Have you not bought a CPU since 2007 or are you not aware that every vendor has an ME equivalent running beside their main processor?

  9. Delivers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "just before it finally delivers 10nm chips for PCs and laptops."

    That remains to be seen. So far they are only claiming that they will deliver them later.
    Just like they've claimed repeatedly.

  10. Deep Learning Boost by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

    Dear Intel,

    can you "deep learn" from your Meltdown and Spectre mistakes? Seriously, I have a Celeron from about 2005 with these vulnerabilities.

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  11. Intel Demonstrates 10nm Ice Lake Processor by Tyger-ZA · · Score: 1

    But when will they demonstrate a hot shit processor? What are these stupid fucking names for anyway? It tells me nothing about what this processor is and I have to go look for that info elsewhere

    1. Re:Intel Demonstrates 10nm Ice Lake Processor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Answer to your question is the same as the answer to most other questions about why something is no longer fun or intersting or funny. "Lawyers" Really.

      At one point you could come up with cool internal project names. Then someone named a project "Jedi". Internal project name, not external marketing name. Lucasfilm sued them anyways. So now the only names allowed for any project have to come from a map. So it's rivers, lakes, towns, mountains only, etc.......... :(
        So unfortunately your "hot shit" name will never happen unless someone names a town "hot shit". Oh and you can't use numbers anymore either since you cannot trademark "586" etc. So you have to use names.

  12. DL Boost? by ShoulderOfOrion · · Score: 1

    This appears to be an enhancement to the AVX instructions, and a 16-bit "brain floating point". Are there any real applications for this on a PC, or is this just a marketing buzzword for toy applications? Personally, if Intel has transistors to burn, I'd rather they burn them finding ways to speed up context switching. That would make for noticeable improvements in PC responsiveness even with clock speeds remaining the same, particularly as the number of cores increase.

  13. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion