Intel Desktop Roadmap Leaked

Terry Olaes

Terry Olaes

I Used to be the [H] News Guy
2FA
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
4,646
Intel’s desktop roadmap for the next couple of quarters has been leaked and Electronista has the scoop, courtesy of Google-translated Japanese site Impress. Say hello to the value-market Core i3 CPU, which dumps the Turbo Boost OC feature in the i5 and i7 models. Core i9 (aka Gulftown) isn’t in this roadmap and it’s expected that Intel will issue a revision to work in the new performance king in Spring 2010.

The lineup is now believed to be headlined by low-powered S versions of the Core i5-750 and i7-860 that will run all four cores at 2.4GHz and 2.53GHz respectively; they should use just 82W of power versus 95W or more and fit into tighter spaces. Each will have 8MB of Level 2 cache, though the Core i7 chips will scale up to 3.46GHz where the Core i5 will stop at 3.2GHz.
Click to expand...
 
Currently Bloomfields are 4 core hyper threaded, effectively 8 threads. Other options seem like current lineup, exception being the 920 going away, in lue of the 950?
 
Question is, why? Considering how badly most current software scales for mult-core/thread hardware, there's really no point in going beyond 2.
 
hyper-threading really makes the GUI smooth. ask kyle bennett himself if you don't believe me.
 
Will wait for 22nm so I don't set the house on fire while overclocking.
 
niconx said:
Will wait for 22nm so I don't set the house on fire while overclocking.
Click to expand...

Had similar thoughts but will likely be waiting for another 5 years! :eek:

On the other hand, the i5 6x0 stands out as odd to me. Seems similar to the 6x1 but cost $100 more. Its like they are targeting that for businesses. Anyone care to chime in on that?
 
jubbie said:
Had similar thoughts but will likely be waiting for another 5 years! :eek:

On the other hand, the i5 6x0 stands out as odd to me. Seems similar to the 6x1 but cost $100 more. Its like they are targeting that for businesses. Anyone care to chime in on that?
Click to expand...

Yea, the only reason the 6x0 cost more is because it has VT-x/d enabled and uses VPro. Most virtual computing (VT-x/d) is done by businesses or people who NEED it (aka Windows7 XP mode). VPro is for remote management of the PC outside the OS, not something a home user would need.

It is kinda funny when you realize that original Core2 E6x00 chips released over 3 years ago all had VT-x but these new Core i3 i5 do not have it. Even my little E6300 1.86GHz has it. Yet another reason I wait for 22nm, I need VT-x support at the very least.
 
FYI there's a load of extra charts at the original link. Among other things the mobile roadmap was leaked too; as were charts in the same format as other leaked roadmaps from the last few years.
 
Curious that they're not including V-T in those models, since even their new Celeron and Pentium Dual Core chips are including it now. Presumably this is mainly for XP mode, but I'm guessing Intel sees virtualization becoming increasingly relevant for home and business desktops alike. Just weird they have apparently backpedaled on that. A $50 Celeron E3300 has it ffs, why pull it from the Core i5s?
 
keenan said:
Curious that they're not including V-T in those models, since even their new Celeron and Pentium Dual Core chips are including it now. Presumably this is mainly for XP mode, but I'm guessing Intel sees virtualization becoming increasingly relevant for home and business desktops alike. Just weird they have apparently backpedaled on that. A $50 Celeron E3300 has it ffs, why pull it from the Core i5s?
Click to expand...

Oops lol, apparently the i3 and i5 do support VT-x! I remember reading some earlier charts that said they did not include VT-x. Here is a better chart from this article that shows features:

http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/pcw/docs/331/818/kaigai3.jpg

Apparently the 6x0 has a lower TDP at 73W instead of 87W on the 6x1. I bet that thing would be a great overclocker at such a low TDP. It also has Trusted Execution Technology (TXT) which the 6x1 does not have.
 
Reason for lower TDP is because the graphics core is clocked at a lower speed. That being said, you'd think whether having a graphics core would hamper overclocking abilities on the chip. Dont know if its just me but it seems like they are launching too many different products that seem to overlap each other. Just like VT-x and VT-d, much of a difference in reality? Doubt many would notice.
 
s/Leaked/"cool sounding" advertisement/

seriously these kinda things can't really be classed as leaks. newspeak doubleplusbad
 
Vorazan said:
Question is, why? Considering how badly most current software scales for mult-core/thread hardware, there's really no point in going beyond 2.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not really the case at all. The software that needs to be multicore is multicore.
 
Vorazan said:
Question is, why? Considering how badly most current software scales for mult-core/thread hardware, there's really no point in going beyond 2.
Click to expand...

Says you..... Clearly you don't do a lot on your system at one time or anything CPU intensive.

Heck, when i play Tf2 i assign it to 3 of my 4 cores in affinity and i get %60-%80 usage, that is just one game, meanwhile i alt+tab out to do many other things when i die....

IM
Music
FF for forums
Burn some dvd's
Printer covers
Skype

With a quad core at 4.1Ghz, i have no worries about not having enough power or having stutter or delays trying to do anything, while a dual core would drop to it's knee's for me.
 
MrGuvernment said:
With a quad core at 4.1Ghz, i have no worries about not having enough power or having stutter or delays trying to do anything, while a dual core would drop to it's knee's for me.
Click to expand...

I can play COD4 on my c2d 2.8 and alt-tab out to do stuff without a problem. Actually I played a couple games of COD4 while Simcity4 was still running as a crashed process lol I can open up two sessions of EVE online 1920x1080 window mode without any trouble also.
 
So much power but not enough software to utilize it. Its like a world where everyone has a ferrari but not enough roads.
 
So Core i3 and Core i5 6x0 have Hyper Threading but can just process 4 threads in total?

Any way to explain this other than these are going to be dual core Nehalems?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top